BACKGROUND: Advancements in left ventricular assist device (LVAD) technology have improved long-term survival for properly selected patients with advanced heart failure. However, the subset of patients in critical cardiogenic shock remain difficult to treat with persistently high patient morbidity and mortality. The goal of this study is to describe our institutional experience utilizing extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) as a bridge to LVAD for patients in cardiogenic shock comparing the less invasive complete sternal-sparing (CSS) surgical technique to median sternotomy. METHODS: Data was collected as a single center retrospective review of patients implanted with a continuous-flow LVAD directly off ECMO from 2012 to 2018. Patients were stratified by LVAD surgical technique. The primary outcome was survival to discharge. Secondary outcomes included postoperative complications, resource utilization and survival at 6-months. RESULTS: Of the 37 patients implanted directly off ECMO, 26 (70%) patients were implanted via median sternotomy and 11 (30%) patients by the CSS approach. Median time on ECMO support was 8 days (range, 2-29 days). Preoperative characteristics were similar between groups. Survival to discharge was 78% overall (73% vs. 91% CSS, P=0.391). The CSS cohort had fewer postoperative complications, including fewer transfusions (P=0.044) and trend towards less right ventricular (RV) failure (62% vs. 27% CSS, P=0.079). Both cohorts required similar median length of stay (LOS) in the intensive care unit (ICU) (11 vs. 12 days, P=0.695) and similar overall hospital LOS (34 vs. 22 days, P=0.242). Overall survival was 74% at six months (68% vs. 89% CSS, P=0.386). CONCLUSIONS: VA ECMO can be used effectively as a bridge-to-LVAD for patients in cardiogenic shock. The less invasive CSS approach demonstrates potential advantages to median sternotomy. Further study is needed to better understand the benefits of less invasive surgical techniques. 2019 Journal of Thoracic Disease. All rights reserved.
BACKGROUND: Advancements in left ventricular assist device (LVAD) technology have improved long-term survival for properly selected patients with advanced heart failure. However, the subset of patients in critical cardiogenic shock remain difficult to treat with persistently high patient morbidity and mortality. The goal of this study is to describe our institutional experience utilizing extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) as a bridge to LVAD for patients in cardiogenic shock comparing the less invasive complete sternal-sparing (CSS) surgical technique to median sternotomy. METHODS: Data was collected as a single center retrospective review of patients implanted with a continuous-flow LVAD directly off ECMO from 2012 to 2018. Patients were stratified by LVAD surgical technique. The primary outcome was survival to discharge. Secondary outcomes included postoperative complications, resource utilization and survival at 6-months. RESULTS: Of the 37 patients implanted directly off ECMO, 26 (70%) patients were implanted via median sternotomy and 11 (30%) patients by the CSS approach. Median time on ECMO support was 8 days (range, 2-29 days). Preoperative characteristics were similar between groups. Survival to discharge was 78% overall (73% vs. 91% CSS, P=0.391). The CSS cohort had fewer postoperative complications, including fewer transfusions (P=0.044) and trend towards less right ventricular (RV) failure (62% vs. 27% CSS, P=0.079). Both cohorts required similar median length of stay (LOS) in the intensive care unit (ICU) (11 vs. 12 days, P=0.695) and similar overall hospital LOS (34 vs. 22 days, P=0.242). Overall survival was 74% at six months (68% vs. 89% CSS, P=0.386). CONCLUSIONS: VA ECMO can be used effectively as a bridge-to-LVAD for patients in cardiogenic shock. The less invasive CSS approach demonstrates potential advantages to median sternotomy. Further study is needed to better understand the benefits of less invasive surgical techniques. 2019 Journal of Thoracic Disease. All rights reserved.
Authors: Nuccia Morici; Fabrizio Oliva; Silvia Ajello; Miriam Stucchi; Alice Sacco; Manlio Gianni Cipriani; Michele De Bonis; Andrea Garascia; Maria Pia Gagliardone; Giulio Melisurgo; Claudio Francesco Russo; Carlo La Vecchia; Maria Frigerio; Federico Pappalardo Journal: Am Heart J Date: 2018-07-20 Impact factor: 4.749
Authors: Veli-Pekka Harjola; Johan Lassus; Alessandro Sionis; Lars Køber; Tuukka Tarvasmäki; Jindrich Spinar; John Parissis; Marek Banaszewski; Jose Silva-Cardoso; Valentina Carubelli; Salvatore Di Somma; Heli Tolppanen; Uwe Zeymer; Holger Thiele; Markku S Nieminen; Alexandre Mebazaa Journal: Eur J Heart Fail Date: 2015-03-28 Impact factor: 15.534
Authors: Amit Pawale; Yosef Schwartz; Shinobu Itagaki; Sean Pinney; David H Adams; Anelechi C Anyanwu Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2017-11-21 Impact factor: 5.209
Authors: Katherine L Wood; Brian C Ayers; Fabio Sagebin; Himabindu Vidula; Sabu Thomas; Jeffrey D Alexis; Bryan Barrus; Peter Knight; Sunil Prasad; Igor Gosev Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2018-11-13 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: Mandeep R Mehra; Daniel J Goldstein; Nir Uriel; Joseph C Cleveland; Melana Yuzefpolskaya; Christopher Salerno; Mary N Walsh; Carmelo A Milano; Chetan B Patel; Gregory A Ewald; Akinobu Itoh; David Dean; Arun Krishnamoorthy; William G Cotts; Antone J Tatooles; Ulrich P Jorde; Brian A Bruckner; Jerry D Estep; Valluvan Jeevanandam; Gabriel Sayer; Douglas Horstmanshof; James W Long; Sanjeev Gulati; Eric R Skipper; John B O'Connell; Gerald Heatley; Poornima Sood; Yoshifumi Naka Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2018-03-11 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Arman Kilic; Ibrahim Sultan; David D Yuh; Ashish S Shah; William A Baumgartner; Duke E Cameron; John V Conte Journal: J Card Surg Date: 2013-02-06 Impact factor: 1.620
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