Literature DB >> 27005981

Implanting permanent left ventricular assist devices in patients on veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support: do we really need a cardiopulmonary bypass machine?

Muhammad S K M Abdeen1, Alexander Albert1, Bujar Maxhera1, Till Hoffmann2, Georgi Petrov1, Stephan Sixt3, Elisabeth Roussel2, Ralf Westenfeld4, Artur Lichtenberg1, Diyar Saeed5.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Selected patients who failed to be weaned off temporary veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) support may be considered for long-term left ventricular assist devices (LVADs). Activation of the systemic inflammatory response due to the cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) machine and its associated deleterious effects on the coagulation system have been well documented. The aim of the study was to compare the outcome of patients receiving VAD on VA-ECMO with patients who were converted to CPB at the time of VAD implantation.
METHODS: Data of patients undergoing LVAD implantation between January 2010 and September 2015 were retrospectively reviewed. Inclusion criteria were patients with prior VA-ECMO. Perioperative characteristics and postoperative outcome of patients who received LVAD after VA-ECMO with (CPB group) or without CPB (no-CPB group) were compared.
RESULTS: A total of 110 permanent VADs were implanted during this time frame. Forty patients had VA-ECMO prior to VAD implantation and met the inclusion criteria. The CPB was used in 23 patients and 17 patients received VAD on VA-ECMO without using CPB. The preoperative characteristics of the patients were comparable except for lower body mass index, higher international normalized ratio (INR) and higher rate of preoperative intra-aortic balloon pump usage in the CPB group (P = 0.035, 0.008 and 0.003, respectively). The incidence of postoperative right VAD implantation and survival rate was comparable between both groups. However, the chest tube blood loss and amount of blood product usage was higher in the CPB group. The total blood loss in the first 24 h after surgery (2469 ± 2067 vs 1080 ± 941 ml, P= 0.05) and number of units of intraoperative fresh frozen plasma administered (4 ± 3 vs 1 ± 2, P= 0.02) remained higher in the CPB group even after adjustment for differences in preoperative INR value by propensity score matching.
CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that the CPB machine can be safely omitted when a long-term VAD is implanted on VA-ECMO support. Blood loss in the first 24 h after surgery was less and a significantly lower number of blood products were necessary in these patients compared with patients in whom the CPB machine was used. However, similar survival rates between these two groups were observed.
© The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  CPB; Cardiogenic shock; ECLS; ECMO; VAD

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27005981     DOI: 10.1093/ejcts/ezw073

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Cardiothorac Surg        ISSN: 1010-7940            Impact factor:   4.191


  9 in total

1.  Preoperative and intraoperative extracorporeal membrane oxygenation adoption for long-term left ventricular assist device implantation.

Authors:  Bujar Maxhera; Nihat Firat Sipahi; Alexander Albert; Udo Boeken; Artur Lichtenberg; Diyar Saeed
Journal:  Ann Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2019-01

2.  Traditional and non-traditional anticoagulation management during extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

Authors:  Andreas Koster; Edis Ljajikj; David Faraoni
Journal:  Ann Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2019-01

Review 3.  Advanced Nanocomposite Hydrogels for Cartilage Tissue Engineering.

Authors:  Jianghong Huang; Fei Liu; Haijing Su; Jianyi Xiong; Lei Yang; Jiang Xia; Yujie Liang
Journal:  Gels       Date:  2022-02-21

4.  Extracorporeal life support prior to left ventricular assist device implantation leads to improvement of the patients INTERMACS levels and outcome.

Authors:  David Schibilsky; Christoph Haller; Bruno Lange; Barbara Schibilsky; Helene Haeberle; Peter Seizer; Meinrad Gawaz; Peter Rosenberger; Tobias Walker; Christian Schlensak
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-03-30       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 5.  Establishing and Sustaining an ECPR Program.

Authors:  Peter C Laussen; Anne-Marie Guerguerian
Journal:  Front Pediatr       Date:  2018-06-06       Impact factor: 3.418

6.  Outcomes of VA-ECMO with and without Left Centricular (LV) Decompression Using Intra-Aortic Balloon Pumping (IABP) versus Other LV Decompression Techniques: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Pan Pan; Peng Yan; Dawei Liu; Xiaoting Wang; Xiang Zhou; Yun Long; Kun Xiao; Weiguo Zhao; Lixin Xie; Longxiang Su
Journal:  Med Sci Monit       Date:  2020-07-30

Review 7.  Minimally invasive ventricular assist device implantation.

Authors:  Ameen Al-Naamani; Florian Fahr; Asim Khan; Christian Bireta; Michael Nozdrzykowski; Stefan Feder; Nikhil Deshmukh; Manal Jubeh; Sandra Eifert; Khalil Jawad; Uwe Schulz; Michael A Borger; Diyar Saeed
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2021-03       Impact factor: 2.895

8.  Left ventricular assist device implants in patients on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: do we need cardiopulmonary bypass?

Authors:  Federico Pappalardo; Evgenij Potapov; Antonio Loforte; Michiel Morshuis; David Schibilsky; Daniel Zimpfer; Julia Riebandt; Christian Etz; Matteo Attisani; Mauro Rinaldi; Assad Haneya; Faiz Ramjankhan; Dirk Donker; Ulrich P Jorde; Daniel Lewin; Radi Wieloch; Rafael Ayala; Jochen Cremer; Letizia Bertoldi; Michael Borger; Artur Lichtenberg; Jan Gummert; Diyar Saeed
Journal:  Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg       Date:  2022-03-31

9.  Rescue extracorporeal life support as a bridge to durable left ventricular assist device.

Authors:  Alina Zubarevich; Konstantin Zhigalov; Marcin Szczechowicz; Arian Arjomandi Rad; Robert Vardanyan; Saeed Torabi; Maria Papathanasiou; Peter Luedike; Achim Koch; Nikolaus Pizanis; Markus Kamler; Bastian Schmack; Arjang Ruhparwar; Alexander Weymann
Journal:  Int J Artif Organs       Date:  2021-10-21       Impact factor: 1.595

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.