Outcomes of patients after successful left ventricular assist device explantation: a EUROMACS study

Aims: Sufficient myocardial recovery with the subsequent explantation of a left ventricular assist device (LVAD) occurs in approximately 1–2% of the cases. However, follow-up data about this condition are scarcely available in the literature. This study aimed to report the long-term outcomes and clinical management following LVAD explantation. Methods and results: An analysis of the European Registry for Patients with Mechanical Circulatory Support was performed to identify all adult patients with myocardial recovery and successful explantation. Pre-implant characteristics were retrieved and compared with the non-recovery patients. The follow-up data after explantation were collected via a questionnaire. A Kaplan–Meier analysis for freedom of the composite endpoint of death, heart transplantation, LVAD reimplantion, or heart failure (HF) relapse was conducted. A total of 45 (1.4%) cases with myocardial recovery resulting in successful LVAD explantation were identified. Compared with those who did not experience myocardial recovery, the explanted patients were younger (44 vs. 56 years, P < 0.001), had a shorter duration of cardiac disease (P < 0.001), and were less likely to have ischaemic cardiomyopathy (9% vs. 41.8%, P < 0.001). Follow-up after explantation could be acquired in 28 (62%) cases. The median age at LVAD implantation was 43 years (inter-quartile range: 29–52),

Impact of a surgical approach for implantation of durable left ventricular assist devices in patients on extracorporeal life support

Background The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of the surgical approach on the postoperative outcome in patients who underwent left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation after having received veno-arterial extracorporeal life support (va-ECLS) using data from a European registry (ECLS-VAD). Five hundred and thirty-one patients were included. Methods A propensity score-adjusted outcome analysis was performed, resulting in 324 patients in the full sternotomy (FS) group and 39 in the less invasive surgery (LIS) group. Results The surgery lasted in median 236 min in the FS group versus 263 min in the LIS group (p = 0.289). The median chest tube output during the first 24 h was similar in both groups. Patients who underwent implantation with an FS required more blood products during the first 24 postoperative hours (median 16 vs. 12, p = 0.033). The incidence of revision due to bleeding was also higher (35.5 vs. 15.4%, p = 0.016). A temporary postoperative right ventricular assist device was necessary in 45.1 (FS) versus 23.1% (LIS) of patients, respectively (p = 0.067). No stroke occurred in the LIS group during the first 30 days after surgery (7.4% in the FS group). The incidence of stroke and of renal, hepatic, and respiratory failure during the follow-up was similar in both groups. The 30-day and one-year survival were similar in both groups. Conclusion LIS for implantation of a durable LVAD in patients on va-ECLS implanted for cardiogenic shock is associated with less revision due to bleeding, less administration of blood products and absence of perioperative stroke, with no impact on survival

Left ventricular assist device implants in patients on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: do we need cardiopulmonary bypass?

OBJECTIVES: Implanting a durable left ventricular assist device (LVAD) in a patient on extracorporeal life support (ECLS) is challenging. The goal of this study was to compare the results of patients from a European registry who had a durable LVAD implanted with or without transition from ECLS to cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). METHODS: A total of 531 patients on ECLS support who had an LVAD implant between January 2010 and August 2018 were analysed; after 1:1 propensity score matching, we identified and compared 175 patients in each group. RESULTS: The duration of preoperative ECLS was 7 [standard deviation (SD) 6] vs 7 (SD 6) days in patients with or without CPB (P = 0.984). The surgical time was longer in the CPB group [285 (SD 72) vs 209 [SD 75] min; P ≤ 0.001). The postoperative chest tube output was comparable [1513 (SD 1311) vs 1390 (SD 1121) ml; P = 0.3]. However, re-exploration for bleeding was necessary in 41% vs 29% of patients with or without CPB (P = 0.01) and a significantly higher number of packed red blood cells and fresh frozen plasma [8 (SD 8) vs 6 (SD 4) units; P = 0.001 and 6 (SD 7) vs 5 (SD 5) units; P = 0.03] were administered to patients operated on with CPB. A postoperative mechanical right ventricular support device was necessary in 50% vs 41% of patients (P = 0.08). The stroke rate was not significantly different (P 0.99). No difference in survival was observed. CONCLUSIONS: Omitting CPB for an LVAD implant in patients on ECLS is safe and results in shorter operating time, less re-exploration for bleeding and fewer blood products. However, no survival benefit is observed

Impact of a surgical approach for implantation of durable left ventricular assist devices in patients on extracorporeal life support

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of the surgical approach on the postoperative outcome in patients who underwent left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation after having received veno-arterial extracorporeal life support (va-ECLS) using data from a European registry (ECLS-VAD). Five hundred and thirty-one patients were included. METHODS: A propensity score-adjusted outcome analysis was performed, resulting in 324 patients in the full sternotomy (FS) group and 39 in the less invasive surgery (LIS) group. RESULTS: The surgery lasted in median 236 min in the FS group versus 263 min in the LIS group (p = 0.289). The median chest tube output during the first 24 h was similar in both groups. Patients who underwent implantation with an FS required more blood products during the first 24 postoperative hours (median 16 vs. 12, p = 0.033). The incidence of revision due to bleeding was also higher (35.5 vs. 15.4%, p = 0.016). A temporary postoperative right ventricular assist device was necessary in 45.1 (FS) versus 23.1% (LIS) of patients, respectively (p = 0.067). No stroke occurred in the LIS group during the first 30 days after surgery (7.4% in the FS group). The incidence of stroke and of renal, hepatic, and respiratory failure during the follow-up was similar in both groups. The 30-day and one-year survival were similar in both groups. CONCLUSION: LIS for implantation of a durable LVAD in patients on va-ECLS implanted for cardiogenic shock is associated with less revision due to bleeding, less administration of blood products and absence of perioperative stroke, with no impact on survival

Impact of extra-corporeal life support (ECLS) cannulation strategy on outcome after durable mechanical circulation support system implantation on behalf of durable MCS after ECLS Study Group

Background: The literature on outcomes of patients requiring durable mechanical circulatory support (MCS) after extra-corporeal life support (ECLS) is limited. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of preoperative ECLS cannulation on postoperative outcome after durable MCS implantation. Methods: The durable MCS after ECLS registry is a multicenter retrospective study that gathered data on consecutive patients who underwent durable MCS implantation after ECLS between January 2010 and August 2018 in eleven high volume European centers. Patients who underwent the implantation of total artificial heart, pulsatile pumps, or first-generation pumps after ECLS were excluded from the analysis. The remaining patients were divided into two groups; central ECLS group (cECLS) and peripheral ECLS group (pECLS). A 1:1 propensity score analysis was performed to identify two matched groups. The outcome of these two groups was compared. Results: A total of 531 durable MCS after ECLS were implanted during this period. The ECLS cannulation site was peripheral in 87% (n=462) and central in 13% (n=69) of the patients. After excluding pulsatile pumps and total artificial heart patients, a total of 494 patients remained (pECLS =434 patients, cECLS =60 patients). A 1:1 propensity score analysis resulted in 2 matched groups (each 55 patients) with median age of 54 years (48-60 years) in cECLS group and 54 years (43-60 years) in pECLS group. HeartWare HVAD (Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN) was implanted in the majority of the patients (cECLS =71% vs. pECLS =76%, P=0.67). All postoperative morbidities were comparable between the groups. The thirty-day, one year and long-term survival was comparable between the groups (P=0.73). Conclusions: The cannulation strategy of ECLS appears to have no impact on the post-operative outcome after durable MCS implantation

ECMO for COVID-19 patients in Europe and Israel

Since March 15th, 2020, 177 centres from Europe and Israel have joined the study, routinely reporting on the ECMO support they provide to COVID-19 patients. The mean annual number of cases treated with ECMO in the participating centres before the pandemic (2019) was 55. The number of COVID-19 patients has increased rapidly each week reaching 1531 treated patients as of September 14th. The greatest number of cases has been reported from France (n = 385), UK (n = 193), Germany (n = 176), Spain (n = 166), and Italy (n = 136) .The mean age of treated patients was 52.6 years (range 16–80), 79% were male. The ECMO configuration used was VV in 91% of cases, VA in 5% and other in 4%. The mean PaO2 before ECMO implantation was 65 mmHg. The mean duration of ECMO support thus far has been 18 days and the mean ICU length of stay of these patients was 33 days. As of the 14th September, overall 841 patients have been weaned from ECMO support, 601 died during ECMO support, 71 died after withdrawal of ECMO, 79 are still receiving ECMO support and for 10 patients status n.a. . Our preliminary data suggest that patients placed on ECMO with severe refractory respiratory or cardiac failure secondary to COVID-19 have a reasonable (55%) chance of survival. Further extensive data analysis is expected to provide invaluable information on the demographics, severity of illness, indications and different ECMO management strategies in these patients

Extracorporeal life support prior to left ventricular assist device implantation leads to improvement of the patients INTERMACS levels and outcome.

BACKGROUND:The objective of this study was to evaluate the outcome of left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation after initial extracorporeal life support (ECLS) in patients with cardiogenic shock and the incidence of post implantation right ventricular failure. METHODS & RESULTS:All patients on ECLS therapy for cardiogenic shock prior to LVAD implantation (n = 15) between October 2011 and January 2014 were analyzed. Baseline patient characteristics, as well as detailed pre-operative treatment and postoperative outcome data were collected retrospectively. At time of admission to our unit all patients were classified INTERMACS II or higher (12 [80%] INTERMACS I). Improvement to INTERMACS III temporary cardiac support (TCS) at time of LVAD implantation was successful in 14 patients (93.3%). End-organ function recovered during ECLS support. No patient needed ongoing ECLS or additional right ventricular support after LVAD implantation. Both in-hospital and 30-day mortality was 6.7% (n = 1). The median duration of LVAD support was 687.9 ± 374.5 days. At the end of the study (follow-up 810.7 +/- 338.9 days), 13 (86.7%) patients were alive. The majority of patients (10 [66.7%]) remained on LVAD support. Transplantation could be performed in 1 (6.7%) patient, 2 (13.3%) patients could be successfully weaned. CONCLUSION:LVAD implantation in ECLS patients leads to improvement of INTERMACS level to INTERMACS III TCS status. Excellent mid-term survival comparable to true INTERMACS III-IV patients could be shown. ECLS prior to LVAD as a bridge-to-bridge therapy may help to lower mortality in primarily unstable patients