Azza Ahmed1, Mustapha Amin2, Barry A Boilson2, Ammar M Killu2, Malini Madhavan3. 1. Department of Hospital Medicine, Mayo Clinic Health System, Eau Claire, WI, USA. 2. Department of Cardiovascular Diseases, Mayo Clinic, 200 First St SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA. 3. Department of Cardiovascular Diseases, Mayo Clinic, 200 First St SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA. madhavan.malini@mayo.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation is a well-known treatment option for patients with advanced heart failure refractory to medical therapy and is recognized both as bridge to transplant and a destination therapy. The risk of ventricular arrhythmias (VAs) is common after LVAD implantation. We review the pathophysiology and recent advances in the management of VA in LVAD patients. RECENT FINDINGS: VAs are most likely to occur in the early post-operative periods after LVAD implantation and a prior history of VA is the most important risk factor. Post-LVAD VAs are usually well tolerated with less morbidity and decreased risk of sudden cardiac death. However, risk of right heart failure in the setting of persistent VAs is being increasingly recognized. The mechanisms of post-LVAD VAs may vary depending on the time from LVAD implantation. Electrical remodeling may play an important role in the immediate post-implant phase. Preexisting myocardial scar and to a lesser extent mechanical irritation from the LVAD cannula are important in the later phases. Most LVAD patients have a previously placed implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD). The benefit of implanting a new ICD in LVAD patients is unknown and should be individualized. For ICD programming, a conservative strategy with higher detection zones and prolonged time to detection is usually recommended aiming to minimize ICD shocks. More aggressive programming is appropriate if the VA results in hemodynamic instability. Antiarrhythmic drugs including amiodarone, mexiletine, and beta blockers are usually the first-line therapy for VAs. Catheter ablation has been shown to be safe and effective in LVAD recipients with recurrent VAs not responsive to antiarrhythmic drugs. LVAD-related VA is most frequently reentrant secondary to myocardial scar and usually well tolerated. Management options include antiarrhythmic drugs and catheter ablation.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation is a well-known treatment option for patients with advanced heart failure refractory to medical therapy and is recognized both as bridge to transplant and a destination therapy. The risk of ventricular arrhythmias (VAs) is common after LVAD implantation. We review the pathophysiology and recent advances in the management of VA in LVAD patients. RECENT FINDINGS:VAs are most likely to occur in the early post-operative periods after LVAD implantation and a prior history of VA is the most important risk factor. Post-LVAD VAs are usually well tolerated with less morbidity and decreased risk of sudden cardiac death. However, risk of right heart failure in the setting of persistent VAs is being increasingly recognized. The mechanisms of post-LVAD VAs may vary depending on the time from LVAD implantation. Electrical remodeling may play an important role in the immediate post-implant phase. Preexisting myocardial scar and to a lesser extent mechanical irritation from the LVAD cannula are important in the later phases. Most LVAD patients have a previously placed implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD). The benefit of implanting a new ICD in LVAD patients is unknown and should be individualized. For ICD programming, a conservative strategy with higher detection zones and prolonged time to detection is usually recommended aiming to minimize ICD shocks. More aggressive programming is appropriate if the VA results in hemodynamic instability. Antiarrhythmic drugs including amiodarone, mexiletine, and beta blockers are usually the first-line therapy for VAs. Catheter ablation has been shown to be safe and effective in LVAD recipients with recurrent VAs not responsive to antiarrhythmic drugs. LVAD-related VA is most frequently reentrant secondary to myocardial scar and usually well tolerated. Management options include antiarrhythmic drugs and catheter ablation.
Authors: Shashima Nakahara; Christopher Chien; Jill Gelow; Khidir Dalouk; Charles A Henrikson; James Mudd; Eric C Stecker Journal: Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol Date: 2013-06
Authors: Daniel B Sims; Gregg Rosner; Nir Uriel; José González-Costello; Frederick A Ehlert; Ulrich P Jorde Journal: Pacing Clin Electrophysiol Date: 2011-06-16 Impact factor: 1.976
Authors: Arthur R Garan; Vivek Iyer; William Whang; Kanika P Mody; Melana Yuzefpolskaya; Paolo C Colombo; Rosie Te-Frey; Hiroo Takayama; Yoshifumi Naka; Hasan Garan; Ulrich P Jorde; Nir Uriel Journal: ASAIO J Date: 2014 May-Jun Impact factor: 2.872
Authors: Hanno Oswald; Claudia Schultz-Wildelau; Ajmal Gardiwal; Ulrich Lüsebrink; Thorben König; Anna Meyer; David Duncker; Maximilian A Pichlmaier; Gunnar Klein; Martin Strüber Journal: Eur J Heart Fail Date: 2010-04-20 Impact factor: 15.534
Authors: Daniel P Mulloy; Castigliano M Bhamidipati; Matthew L Stone; Gorav Ailawadi; James D Bergin; Srijoy Mahapatra; John A Kern Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2012-04-20 Impact factor: 5.209
Authors: Mark S Slaughter; Joseph G Rogers; Carmelo A Milano; Stuart D Russell; John V Conte; David Feldman; Benjamin Sun; Antone J Tatooles; Reynolds M Delgado; James W Long; Thomas C Wozniak; Waqas Ghumman; David J Farrar; O Howard Frazier Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2009-11-17 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Mandeep R Mehra; Yoshifumi Naka; Nir Uriel; Daniel J Goldstein; Joseph C Cleveland; Paolo C Colombo; Mary N Walsh; Carmelo A Milano; Chetan B Patel; Ulrich P Jorde; Francis D Pagani; Keith D Aaronson; David A Dean; Kelly McCants; Akinobu Itoh; Gregory A Ewald; Douglas Horstmanshof; James W Long; Christopher Salerno Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2016-11-16 Impact factor: 91.245