Literature DB >> 28043445

A Decade of Experience With Continuous-Flow Left Ventricular Assist Devices.

Ranjit John1, Christopher T Holley2, Peter Eckman3, Samit S Roy3, Rebecca Cogswell3, Laura Harvey2, Sara Shumway2, Kenneth Liao2.   

Abstract

The use of continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices (CF-LVADs) has revolutionized the landscape of mechanical circulatory support for patients with heart failure. Clinical trials are already testing the next generation of CF-LVADs. In this study, our objective was to review our long-term experience with the current generation of CF-LVADs, specifically, the HeartMate (HM) II (Thoratec Corp, Pleasanton, CA). In this single-center retrospective analysis, we evaluated the records of 278 consecutive patients who underwent a total of 302 HM II placements from June 2005 through June 2014. We excluded 11 patients from our final study group, who had previously undergone placement of a HM XVE that failed. We divided the remaining 267 patients into 3 equal groups of 89 patients each, by time period: group 1, June 2005 through May 2009; group 2, June 2009 through January 2012; and group 3, February 2012 through June 2014. To examine differences in survival between our 3 groups, we used time-to-event analysis, including the Kaplan-Meier method. To examine secondary outcomes (including stroke, hemolysis, gastrointestinal bleeding, pump thrombus, and transplant), we used one-way analysis of variance. For our final study group of 267 patients, the total follow-up time was 479.01 patient-years (median, 469 days). The mean age of patients was 57 years; 81.4% were male. In all, 209 (78.9%) patients underwent HM II placement as a bridge to transplant; 58 (21.1%), as destination therapy (DT). The overall survival rate was 94% at 30 days, 77% at 1 year, 65% at 2 years, 60% at 3 years, 50% at 4 years, and 48% at 5 years. In bridge to transplant patients, the survival rate was 78% at 1 year and 66% at 2 years; in DT patients, 70% and 60%. In group 1 patients, the survival rate was 94% at 30 days, 64% at 1 year, and 48% at 2 years; in group 2, 93%, 88%, and 76%; and in group 3, 94%, 77%, and 73% (P = 0.003). In the later years of our study period, from June 2009 onwards (ie, in groups 2 and 3), we noted a statistically significant increase in HM II placement as DT, a reduction of driveline infections, increasing pump exchange, increasing hemolysis, a reduced frequency of transplants, and an improved survival rate (as compared with the earlier group 1). The HM II has favorably influenced the outcomes of patients with end-stage heart failure, yet major complications still limit their survival. Improving compatibility between the pump and the individual host patient, enhancing anticoagulation strategies, and developing a totally implantable pump might further reduce complications thereby improving survival times and allowing CF-LVAD placement to be a true long-term alternative to a heart transplant.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  circulatory support devices; heart failure; outcomes; surgery (complications)

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 28043445     DOI: 10.1053/j.semtcvs.2016.05.013

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg        ISSN: 1043-0679


  7 in total

Review 1.  Non-patient factors associated with infections in LVAD recipients: A scoping review.

Authors:  Supriya Shore; Michael J Pienta; Tessa M F Watt; Gardner Yost; Whitney A Townsend; Lourdes Cabrera; Michael D Fetters; Carol Chenoweth; Keith D Aaronson; Francis D Pagani; Donald S Likosky
Journal:  J Heart Lung Transplant       Date:  2021-10-22       Impact factor: 13.569

2.  Sequential cataract surgeries in a patient with a left ventricular assist device (LVAD).

Authors:  Alina Yang; Ji Liu
Journal:  BMJ Case Rep       Date:  2018-03-16

3.  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.  Left ventricular assist device-associated infections: incidence and risk factors.

Authors:  Andréa Rahal; Yvon Ruch; Nicolas Meyer; Stéphanie Perrier; Tam Hoang Minh; Clément Schneider; Thierry Lavigne; Sandrine Marguerite; Gharib Ajob; Mircea Cristinar; Eric Epailly; Jean-Philippe Mazzucotelli; Michel Kindo
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2020-05       Impact factor: 2.895

Review 5.  In Full Flow: Left Ventricular Assist Device Infections in the Modern Era.

Authors:  Radoslav Zinoviev; Christopher K Lippincott; Sara C Keller; Nisha A Gilotra
Journal:  Open Forum Infect Dis       Date:  2020-04-17       Impact factor: 3.835

Review 6.  Cardiac prostheses-related hemolytic anemia.

Authors:  Mohamad Alkhouli; Ali Farooq; Ronald S Go; Sudarshan Balla; Chalak Berzingi
Journal:  Clin Cardiol       Date:  2019-05-06       Impact factor: 2.882

7.  Driveline Features as Risk Factor for Infection in Left Ventricular Assist Devices: Meta-Analysis and Experimental Tests.

Authors:  Melanie Kranzl; Martin Stoiber; Anne-Kristin Schaefer; Julia Riebandt; Dominik Wiedemann; Christiane Marko; Günther Laufer; Daniel Zimpfer; Heinrich Schima; Thomas Schlöglhofer
Journal:  Front Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2021-12-16
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.