BACKGROUND: Left ventricular assist devices (LVAD) are increasingly used in patients with end stage heart failure. The HeartAssist 5 and aVAD LVADs offer telemetric monitoring capabilities. Here we report our initial single centre experience with the largest telemonitoring cohort of LVAD patients. METHODS: Eleven patients (9 males) received a telemonitoring-capable LVAD and were included in our telemonitoring cohort. Waveforms and alarm data were obtained from the telemonitoring system and hospital records were reviewed for clinical data. RESULTS: Mean age at LVAD implantation was 59±5.1 years (mean ± standard deviation). Seven patients had non-ischemic cardiomyopathy and 4 patients had ischemic cardiomyopathy. Median LVEF at implant was 16% (IQR, 15-20%). The total follow-up time was 2,438 patient-days. A total of 6,216 alarm messages were generated in 11 patients. Most common were low flow alarms due to hypovolemia, followed by low flow alarms because of suspected pump thrombosis. One patient died during follow-up, one received a cardiac transplant and one had the LVAD explanted because of pump thrombosis. Pump thrombosis was suspected in 5 patients with 8 episodes of sudden flow decreases and laboratory signs of haemolysis. CONCLUSIONS: Real-time telemonitoring of LVAD pump flow, motor speed and power consumption is a promising tool in the follow-up of LVAD recipients. Trending pump flow over hours or days can assist in the early detection of complications, especially flow reductions due to hypovolemia and LVAD thrombosis. Further studies are warranted to delineate the impact of remote monitoring on patients' prognosis.
BACKGROUND: Left ventricular assist devices (LVAD) are increasingly used in patients with end stage heart failure. The HeartAssist 5 and aVAD LVADs offer telemetric monitoring capabilities. Here we report our initial single centre experience with the largest telemonitoring cohort of LVAD patients. METHODS: Eleven patients (9 males) received a telemonitoring-capable LVAD and were included in our telemonitoring cohort. Waveforms and alarm data were obtained from the telemonitoring system and hospital records were reviewed for clinical data. RESULTS: Mean age at LVAD implantation was 59±5.1 years (mean ± standard deviation). Seven patients had non-ischemic cardiomyopathy and 4 patients had ischemic cardiomyopathy. Median LVEF at implant was 16% (IQR, 15-20%). The total follow-up time was 2,438 patient-days. A total of 6,216 alarm messages were generated in 11 patients. Most common were low flow alarms due to hypovolemia, followed by low flow alarms because of suspected pump thrombosis. One patient died during follow-up, one received a cardiac transplant and one had the LVAD explanted because of pump thrombosis. Pump thrombosis was suspected in 5 patients with 8 episodes of sudden flow decreases and laboratory signs of haemolysis. CONCLUSIONS: Real-time telemonitoring of LVAD pump flow, motor speed and power consumption is a promising tool in the follow-up of LVAD recipients. Trending pump flow over hours or days can assist in the early detection of complications, especially flow reductions due to hypovolemia and LVAD thrombosis. Further studies are warranted to delineate the impact of remote monitoring on patients' prognosis.
Authors: Francesco Moscato; Marcus Granegger; Michael Edelmayer; Daniel Zimpfer; Heinrich Schima Journal: Artif Organs Date: 2013-08-01 Impact factor: 3.094
Authors: David Feldman; Salpy V Pamboukian; Jeffrey J Teuteberg; Emma Birks; Katherine Lietz; Stephanie A Moore; Jeffrey A Morgan; Francisco Arabia; Mary E Bauman; Hoger W Buchholz; Mario Deng; Marc L Dickstein; Aly El-Banayosy; Tonya Elliot; Daniel J Goldstein; Kathleen L Grady; Kylie Jones; Katarzyna Hryniewicz; Ranjit John; Annemarie Kaan; Shimon Kusne; Matthias Loebe; M Patricia Massicotte; Nader Moazami; Paul Mohacsi; Martha Mooney; Thomas Nelson; Francis Pagani; William Perry; Evgenij V Potapov; J Eduardo Rame; Stuart D Russell; Erik N Sorensen; Benjamin Sun; Martin Strueber; Abeel A Mangi; Michael G Petty; Joseph Rogers Journal: J Heart Lung Transplant Date: 2013-02 Impact factor: 10.247
Authors: William T Abraham; Philip B Adamson; Robert C Bourge; Mark F Aaron; Maria Rosa Costanzo; Lynne W Stevenson; Warren Strickland; Suresh Neelagaru; Nirav Raval; Steven Krueger; Stanislav Weiner; David Shavelle; Bradley Jeffries; Jay S Yadav Journal: Lancet Date: 2011-02-19 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Daniel J Goldstein; Ranjit John; Christopher Salerno; Scott Silvestry; Nader Moazami; Douglas Horstmanshof; Robert Adamson; Andrew Boyle; Mark Zucker; Joseph Rogers; Stuart Russell; James Long; Francis Pagani; Ulrich Jorde Journal: J Heart Lung Transplant Date: 2013-07 Impact factor: 10.247
Authors: Andrew Brenyo; Mohan Rao; Sushma Koneru; William Hallinan; Samit Shah; H T Massey; Leway Chen; Bronislava Polonsky; Scott McNitt; David T Huang; Ilan Goldenberg; Mehmet Aktas Journal: J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol Date: 2011-11-14
Authors: David J Whellan; Kevin T Ousdigian; Sana M Al-Khatib; Wenji Pu; Shantanu Sarkar; Charles B Porter; Behzad B Pavri; Christopher M O'Connor Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2010-04-27 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Jonathan S Gordon; Elizabeth J Maynes; Thomas J O'Malley; Behzad B Pavri; Vakhtang Tchantchaleishvili Journal: J Interv Card Electrophysiol Date: 2021-01-12 Impact factor: 1.900
Authors: Francesco Moscato; Christoph Gross; Martin Maw; Thomas Schlöglhofer; Marcus Granegger; Daniel Zimpfer; Heinrich Schima Journal: Ann Cardiothorac Surg Date: 2021-03
Authors: Christoph Gross; Kamen Dimitrov; Julia Riebandt; Dominik Wiedemann; Günther Laufer; Heinrich Schima; Francesco Moscato; Michael C Brown; Abhijit Kadrolkar; Robert W Stadler; Daniel Zimpfer; Thomas Schlöglhofer Journal: Life (Basel) Date: 2022-04-09
Authors: Christoph Gross; Heinrich Schima; Thomas Schlöglhofer; Kamen Dimitrov; Martin Maw; Julia Riebandt; Dominik Wiedemann; Daniel Zimpfer; Francesco Moscato Journal: Artif Organs Date: 2020-03-01 Impact factor: 3.094