Literature DB >> 25034705

Midterm outcome of implantable left ventricular assist devices as a bridge to transplantation: Single-center experience in Japan.

Mitsutoshi Kimura1, Osamu Kinoshita1, Kan Nawata1, Takashi Nishimura2, Masaru Hatano3, Teruhiko Imamura3, Miyoko Endo4, Yukie Kagami4, Hitoshi Kubo5, Koichi Kashiwa5, Koichiro Kinugawa6, Shunei Kyo2, Issei Komuro3, Minoru Ono7.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Two implantable continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices (LVADs), DuraHeart (Terumo Heart, Ann Arbor, MI, USA) and EVAHEART (Sun Medical, Nagano, Japan), were approved in Japan in April 2011. We analyzed the midterm outcome of patients implanted with these implantable LVADs at the University of Tokyo Hospital. METHODS AND
RESULTS: A total of 31 patients who underwent implantation of LVADs (10 DuraHeart, 21 EVAHEART) as a bridge to transplantation at our institution between April 2011 and August 2013 were retrospectively reviewed. All patients were followed up through December 2013. Seven patients underwent conversions from NIPRO paracorporeal LVAD (Nipro, Osaka, Japan) to an implantable LVAD. The mean observation period was 483±239 days (41.0 patient years). Eight patients were transplanted and one patient showed functional recovery with subsequent LVAD explantation. Four patients died due to cerebrovascular accident, empyema, or device malfunction due to pump thrombosis after cerebral bleeding. Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed 6-, 12-, and 24-month survival rates of 93%, 86%, and 86%, respectively. The rates of freedom from cerebrovascular accidents and device-related infections at 1 year after LVAD implantation were 65% and 36%, respectively. Twenty-nine patients were discharged home after LVAD implantation. During the period of this study, there were 59 readmissions (53 urgent, 6 elective) among 22 patients (76%). The overall and urgent readmission rates were 1.66 and 1.49 per patient year, respectively. The common reason for readmission was device-related infection (31%), followed by cerebrovascular accidents (17%). The total out-of-hospital time after the primary discharge was 90%.
CONCLUSIONS: Our midterm survival rate after LVAD implantation is satisfactory. However, patients undergoing LVAD support were often readmitted with adverse events.
Copyright © 2014 Japanese College of Cardiology. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bridge to transplantation; Heart failure; Implantable left ventricular assist device; Outcome; Readmission

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25034705     DOI: 10.1016/j.jjcc.2014.06.007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Cardiol        ISSN: 0914-5087            Impact factor:   3.159


  4 in total

1.  Readmissions after continuous flow left ventricular assist device implantation.

Authors:  Mitsutoshi Kimura; Kan Nawata; Osamu Kinoshita; Haruo Yamauchi; Yasuhiro Hoshino; Masaru Hatano; Eisuke Amiya; Koichi Kashiwa; Miyoko Endo; Yukie Kagami; Mariko Nemoto; Minoru Ono
Journal:  J Artif Organs       Date:  2017-07-27       Impact factor: 1.731

2.  Left Ventricular Assist Device Infections: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  John C O'Horo; Omar M Abu Saleh; John M Stulak; Mark P Wilhelm; Larry M Baddour; M Rizwan Sohail
Journal:  ASAIO J       Date:  2018 May/Jun       Impact factor: 2.872

3.  Early and mid-term outcomes of left ventricular assist device implantation and future prospects.

Authors:  Hiroki Hata; Tomoyuki Fujita; Yusuke Shimahara; Shunsuke Sato; Masanobu Yanase; Osamu Seguchi; Takuma Sato; Takeshi Nakatani; Junjiro Kobayashi
Journal:  Gen Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2015-03-24

4.  Contemporary outcomes of continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices-a systematic review.

Authors:  Nicholas McNamara; Harry Narroway; Michael Williams; John Brookes; James Farag; David Cistulli; Paul Bannon; Silvana Marasco; Evgenij Potapov; Antonio Loforte
Journal:  Ann Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2021-03
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.