BACKGROUND: If long-term use of left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) as bridges to transplantation is successful, the issue of permanent device implantation in lieu of transplantation could be addressed through the creation of appropriately designed trials. Our medium-term experience with both pneumatically and electrically powered ThermoCardiosystems LVADs is presented to outline the benefits and limitations of device support in lieu of transplantation. METHODS AND RESULTS: Detailed records were kept prospectively for all patients undergoing LVAD insertion. Fifty-eight LVADs were inserted over 5 years, with a survival rate of 74%. Mean patient age was 50 years, and duration of support averaged 98 days. Although common, both preexisting infection and infection during LVAD support were not associated with increased mortality or decreased rate of successful transplantation. Thromboembolic complications were rare, occurring in only three patients (5%) despite the absence of anticoagulation. Ventricular arrhythmias were well tolerated in all patients except in cases of early perioperative right ventricular failure, with no deaths. Right ventricular failure occurred in one third of patients and was managed in a small percentage by right ventricular assist device (RVAD) support and/or inhaled nitric oxide therapy. There were no serious device malfunctions, but five graft-related hemorrhages resulted in two deaths. Finally, a variety of noncardiac surgical procedures were performed in LVAD recipients, with no major morbidity and mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Over all, our medium-term experience with implantable LVAD support is encouraging. Although additional areas of investigation exist, improvements in patients selection and management together with device alterations that have reduced the thromboembolic incidence and facilitated patient rehabilitation lead us to believe that a prospective, randomized trial is indicated to study the role that LVADs may have as an alternative to medical management.
BACKGROUND: If long-term use of left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) as bridges to transplantation is successful, the issue of permanent device implantation in lieu of transplantation could be addressed through the creation of appropriately designed trials. Our medium-term experience with both pneumatically and electrically powered ThermoCardiosystems LVADs is presented to outline the benefits and limitations of device support in lieu of transplantation. METHODS AND RESULTS: Detailed records were kept prospectively for all patients undergoing LVAD insertion. Fifty-eight LVADs were inserted over 5 years, with a survival rate of 74%. Mean patient age was 50 years, and duration of support averaged 98 days. Although common, both preexisting infection and infection during LVAD support were not associated with increased mortality or decreased rate of successful transplantation. Thromboembolic complications were rare, occurring in only three patients (5%) despite the absence of anticoagulation. Ventricular arrhythmias were well tolerated in all patients except in cases of early perioperative right ventricular failure, with no deaths. Right ventricular failure occurred in one third of patients and was managed in a small percentage by right ventricular assist device (RVAD) support and/or inhaled nitric oxide therapy. There were no serious device malfunctions, but five graft-related hemorrhages resulted in two deaths. Finally, a variety of noncardiac surgical procedures were performed in LVAD recipients, with no major morbidity and mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Over all, our medium-term experience with implantable LVAD support is encouraging. Although additional areas of investigation exist, improvements in patients selection and management together with device alterations that have reduced the thromboembolic incidence and facilitated patient rehabilitation lead us to believe that a prospective, randomized trial is indicated to study the role that LVADs may have as an alternative to medical management.
Authors: Konstantinos G Malliaras; John V Terrovitis; Stavros G Drakos; John N Nanas Journal: J Cardiovasc Transl Res Date: 2008-09-30 Impact factor: 4.132
Authors: Peter Germann; Antonio Braschi; Giorgio Della Rocca; Anh Tuan Dinh-Xuan; Konrad Falke; Claes Frostell; Lars E Gustafsson; Philippe Hervé; Philippe Jolliet; Udo Kaisers; Hector Litvan; Duncan J Macrae; Marco Maggiorini; Nandor Marczin; Bernd Mueller; Didier Payen; Marco Ranucci; Dietmar Schranz; Rainer Zimmermann; Roman Ullrich Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2005-06-23 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Grace Y Minamoto; Doreen Lee; Adriana Colovai; Dana Levy; Ljiljana Vasovic; Keith W Roach; Jonathan Shuter; Daniel Goldstein; David D'Alessandro; Ulrich P Jorde; Victoria A Muggia Journal: J Thorac Dis Date: 2017-01 Impact factor: 2.895
Authors: Betul Yilmaz; Warren A Zuckerman; Teresa M Lee; Kimberly D Beddows; Lisa A Gilmore; Rakesh K Singh; Marc E Richmond; Jonathan M Chen; Linda J Addonizio Journal: Pediatr Transplant Date: 2013-05-26