Literature DB >> 9286774

The influence of infection on survival and successful transplantation in patients with left ventricular assist devices.

M Argenziano1, K A Catanese, N Moazami, M T Gardocki, A D Weinberg, M W Clavenna, E A Rose, B E Scully, H R Levin, M C Oz.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Mechanical cardiac assistance has recently emerged as a tenable option in the treatment of end-stage heart failure. In spite of recent technical improvements that have reduced the incidence of life-threatening complications, the reported frequency of infections in these patients has remained high.
METHODS: Over a 5-year period, 60 patients underwent insertion of a left ventricular assist device (LVAD) at our institution. Detailed medical records were kept prospectively for all patients, and a variety of endpoints were analyzed, including the incidence, nature, and sequelae of infections before and after LVAD implantation and after transplantation.
RESULTS: Twenty-nine of 60 patients (48%) undergoing LVAD insertion subsequently had development of infections. The most frequent sites of infection were blood, LVAD drivelines, and central venous catheters, representing 61% of all infections. At the time of LVAD implantation, 13 of 60 patients (22%) had culture-proven infections. In spite of an increased incidence of subsequent infection (77% vs 40%), there were no differences in rates of mortality (31% vs 26%), LVAD endocarditis, (23% vs 11%) and eventual transplantation (62% vs 57%) between these patients and those without periimplantation infections. Although the overall mortality rate was not influenced by infections during LVAD support (28% vs 26%), the development of LVAD endocarditis was associated with a high mortality rate. Finally, although patients with infections during LVAD support had significantly longer median support times than those who remained infection free (101 vs 49 days, respectively), there was no difference in the rate of successful transplantation (59% vs 58%) or in the rate of infection after transplantation (35% vs 28%).
CONCLUSIONS: Infections are common in patients undergoing LVAD support, but they do not adversely affect survival, the rate of successful transplantation, or the incidence of posttransplantation infection. Periimplantation infections may increase the risk of subsequent infections, but they also do not influence survival or transplantability. Patients with development of LVAD endocarditis are at increased risk for morbidity and death and require early and aggressive therapy, potentially including device explantation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9286774

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Heart Lung Transplant        ISSN: 1053-2498            Impact factor:   10.247


  12 in total

1.  Canadian Cardiovascular Society Consensus Conference update on cardiac transplantation 2008: Executive Summary.

Authors:  H Haddad; D Isaac; J F Legare; P Pflugfelder; P Hendry; M Chan; B Cantin; N Giannetti; S Zieroth; M White; W Warnica; K Doucette; V Rao; A Dipchand; M Cantarovich; W Kostuk; R Cecere; E Charbonneau; H Ross; N Poirier
Journal:  Can J Cardiol       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 5.223

2.  Infection management in a patient with a left ventricular assist device: a case report of long-term cefazolin sodium hydrate administration.

Authors:  Eiki Tayama; Koichi Arinaga; Takahiro Shojima; Kazuyoshi Takagi; Yoshinori Yokokura; Kazuhiro Yoshikawa; Hidetsugu Hori; Shuji Fukunaga; Hidetoshi Akashi; Shigeaki Aoyagi
Journal:  J Artif Organs       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 1.731

3.  Japanese multicenter clinical evaluation of the HeartMate vented electric left ventricular assist system.

Authors:  Ryozo Omoto; Shunei Kyo; Motonobu Nishimura; Hikaru Matsuda; Goro Matsumiya; Soichiro Kitamura; Takeshi Nakatani; Shinichi Takamoto; Mdminoru Ono; Koichi Tabayashi; Ryohei Yozu
Journal:  J Artif Organs       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 1.731

4.  Early adverse events as predictors of 1-year mortality during mechanical circulatory support.

Authors:  Elizabeth A Genovese; Mary Amanda Dew; Jeffrey J Teuteberg; Marc A Simon; Jay K Bhama; Christian A Bermudez; Kathleen L Lockard; Steve Winowich; Robert L Kormos
Journal:  J Heart Lung Transplant       Date:  2010-07-01       Impact factor: 10.247

Review 5.  Endocarditis in left ventricular assist device.

Authors:  Braghadheeswar Thyagarajan; Monisha Priyadarshini Kumar; Rutuja R Sikachi; Abhinav Agrawal
Journal:  Intractable Rare Dis Res       Date:  2016-08

Review 6.  Mechanical support in acute and chronic heart failure.

Authors:  Andreas Brieke; Joseph Cleveland; JoAnn Lindenfeld
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2008-05       Impact factor: 2.931

7.  Ventricular assist device infections.

Authors:  Denis Spelman; Donald Esmore
Journal:  Curr Infect Dis Rep       Date:  2012-08       Impact factor: 3.725

8.  Long-term medical control of inflow cuff infection in a patient with a left ventricular assist system.

Authors:  Shunsuke Saito; Goro Matsumiya; Taichi Sakaguchi; Tomoyuki Fujita; Toru Kuratani; Hajime Ichikawa; Yoshiki Sawa
Journal:  J Artif Organs       Date:  2009-03-29       Impact factor: 1.731

9.  Renal replacement therapy in congestive heart failure requiring left ventricular assist device augmentation.

Authors:  Bernadette A Thomas; Christine M Logar; Arthur E Anderson
Journal:  Perit Dial Int       Date:  2012 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 1.756

10.  SdrF, a Staphylococcus epidermidis surface protein, contributes to the initiation of ventricular assist device driveline-related infections.

Authors:  Carlos Arrecubieta; Faustino A Toba; Manuel von Bayern; Hirokazu Akashi; Mario C Deng; Yoshifumi Naka; Franklin D Lowy
Journal:  PLoS Pathog       Date:  2009-05-01       Impact factor: 6.823

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.