Daniel Burkhoff1, Mathew S Maurer2, Susan M Joseph3, Joseph G Rogers4, Edo Y Birati5, J Eduardo Rame5, Sanjiv J Shah6. 1. HeartWare International, Framingham, Massachusetts; Division of Cardiology, Columbia University, New York, New York. Electronic address: db59@columbia.edu. 2. Division of Cardiology, Columbia University, New York, New York. 3. Division of Cardiology, Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri. 4. Division of Cardiology, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina. 5. Division of Cardiology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 6. Division of Cardiology, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to provide insight into the potential for left atrium (LA) to aortic mechanical circulatory support as a treatment for patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). BACKGROUND: Although HFpEF arises from different etiologies, 1 hallmark of all forms of this syndrome is a small or minimally-dilated left ventricle (LV). Consequently, the use of traditional mechanical circulatory support in end-stage patients has been difficult. In contrast, HFpEF is also characterized by a large LA. METHODS: Hemodynamic characteristics of 4 distinct HFpEF phenotypes were characterized from the published data: 1) hypertrophic cardiomyopathies; 2) infiltrative diseases; 3) nonhypertrophic HFpEF; and 4) HFpEF with common cardiovascular comorbidities (e.g., hypertension). Employing a previously-described cardiovascular simulation, the effects of a low-flow, micropump-based LA decompression device were modeled. The effect of sourcing blood from the LV versus the LA was compared. RESULTS: For all HFpEF phenotypes, mechanical circulatory support significantly increased cardiac output, provided a mild increase in blood pressure, and markedly reduced pulmonary and LA pressures. LV sourcing of blood reduced LV end-systolic volume into a range likely to induce suction. With LA sourcing, however, LV end-systolic volume increased compared with baseline. Due to pre-existing LA enlargement, LA volumes remained sufficiently elevated, thus minimizing the risk of suction. CONCLUSIONS: This theoretical analysis suggests that a strategy involving pumping blood from the LA to the arterial system may provide a viable option for end-stage HFpEF. Special considerations apply to each of the 4 types of HFpEF phenotypes described. Finally, an HFpEF-specific clinical profile scoring system (such as that of INTERMACS [Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support]) would aid in the selection of patients with the appropriate risk-benefit ratio for implantation of an active pump.
OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to provide insight into the potential for left atrium (LA) to aortic mechanical circulatory support as a treatment for patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). BACKGROUND: Although HFpEF arises from different etiologies, 1 hallmark of all forms of this syndrome is a small or minimally-dilated left ventricle (LV). Consequently, the use of traditional mechanical circulatory support in end-stage patients has been difficult. In contrast, HFpEF is also characterized by a large LA. METHODS: Hemodynamic characteristics of 4 distinct HFpEF phenotypes were characterized from the published data: 1) hypertrophic cardiomyopathies; 2) infiltrative diseases; 3) nonhypertrophic HFpEF; and 4) HFpEF with common cardiovascular comorbidities (e.g., hypertension). Employing a previously-described cardiovascular simulation, the effects of a low-flow, micropump-based LA decompression device were modeled. The effect of sourcing blood from the LV versus the LA was compared. RESULTS: For all HFpEF phenotypes, mechanical circulatory support significantly increased cardiac output, provided a mild increase in blood pressure, and markedly reduced pulmonary and LA pressures. LV sourcing of blood reduced LV end-systolic volume into a range likely to induce suction. With LA sourcing, however, LV end-systolic volume increased compared with baseline. Due to pre-existing LA enlargement, LA volumes remained sufficiently elevated, thus minimizing the risk of suction. CONCLUSIONS: This theoretical analysis suggests that a strategy involving pumping blood from the LA to the arterial system may provide a viable option for end-stage HFpEF. Special considerations apply to each of the 4 types of HFpEF phenotypes described. Finally, an HFpEF-specific clinical profile scoring system (such as that of INTERMACS [Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support]) would aid in the selection of patients with the appropriate risk-benefit ratio for implantation of an active pump.
Authors: Chihiro Miyagi; Barry D Kuban; Christine R Flick; Anthony R Polakowski; Takuma Miyamoto; Jamshid H Karimov; Randall C Starling; Kiyotaka Fukamachi Journal: Heart Fail Rev Date: 2021-05-01 Impact factor: 4.214
Authors: Jason M Elinoff; Richa Agarwal; Christopher F Barnett; Raymond L Benza; Michael J Cuttica; Ahmed M Gharib; Michael P Gray; Paul M Hassoun; Anna R Hemnes; Marc Humbert; Todd M Kolb; Tim Lahm; Jane A Leopold; Stephen C Mathai; Vallerie V McLaughlin; Ioana R Preston; Erika B Rosenzweig; Oksana A Shlobin; Virginia D Steen; Roham T Zamanian; Michael A Solomon Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2018-07-15 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Benjamin H Freed; Vistasp Daruwalla; Jeanette Y Cheng; Frank G Aguilar; Lauren Beussink; Andrew Choi; David A Klein; Debra Dixon; Abigail Baldridge; Laura J Rasmussen-Torvik; Kameswari Maganti; Sanjiv J Shah Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2016-03 Impact factor: 7.792