Left Ventricular Assist Device as a Destination Therapy: Current Situation and the Importance of Patient Selection

Advanced heart failure is a growing problem for which the best treatment is cardiac transplantation. However, the shortage of donors’ hearts made left ventricular assist devices as destination therapy (DT-LVAD) a highly recommended alternative: they improved mid-term prognosis as well as patients’ quality of life. Current intracorporeal pumps with a centrifugal continuous flow evolved in the last few years. Since 2003, when first LVAD was approved for long-term support, smaller device sizes with better survival and hemocompatibility profile were reached. The most important difficulty lies in the moment of the implant. Recent indications range from INTERMACS class 2 to 4, with close monitoring in intermediate cases. Moreover, a large multiparametric study is needed for considering the candidacy: basal situation, with a special interest in frailty, comorbidities, including renal and hepatic dysfunction, and medical background, considering every prior cardiac condition, must be evaluated. In addition, some clinical risk scores can be helpful to measure the possibility of right heart failure or morbi-mortality. With this review, we sought to summarize all the device improvements, with their updated clinical results, as well as to focus on all the patient selection criteria

Effectiveness and Safety of Balloon Pulmonary Angioplasty for the Treatment of Patients with Persistent Pulmonary Hypertension after Pulmonary Endarterectomy

(1) Background: Pulmonary endarterectomy (PEA) is the “gold standard” treatment for operable patients with chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH). Persistent pulmonary hypertension (PH) after PEA confers a worse prognosis. Balloon pulmonary angioplasty (BPA) could represent a useful therapy in this setting, but evidence about its effectiveness and safety in patients with previous PEA is limited. (2) Methods: A total of 14 patients with persistent PH after PEA were treated with BPA in a single PH center. Hemodynamic and clinical effects of BPA and complications of the procedure were retrospectively collected. (3) Results: After BPA, the mean pulmonary arterial pressure fell from 50.7 ± 15.3 mmHg to 38.0 ± 7.9 mmHg (25.0% decrease; 95% confidence interval (CI) 14.0–35.5%; p = 0.01). Pulmonary vascular resistances were reduced from 8.5 ± 3.6 WU to 5.3 ± 2.2 WU (37.6% decrease; 95% CI 18.8–56.5%; p = 0.01). WHO functional class was also improved with BPA. Severe BPA-related complications were infrequent and no periprocedural deaths were observed. (4) Conclusions: BPA is an effective and safe therapy for patients with CTEPH and persistent PH after PEA

Impact of Complete Revascularization on Development of Heart Failure in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome and Multivessel Disease: A Subanalysis of the CORALYS Registry

Background The impact of complete revascularization (CR) on the development of heart failure (HF) in patients with acute coronary syndrome and multivessel coronary artery disease undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention remains to be elucidated. Methods and Results Consecutive patients with acute coronary syndrome with multivessel coronary artery disease from the CORALYS (Incidence and Predictors of Heart Failure After Acute Coronary Syndrome) registry were included. Incidence of first hospitalization for HF or cardiovascular death was the primary end point. Patients were stratified according to completeness of coronary revascularization. Of 14 699 patients in the CORALYS registry, 5054 presented with multivessel disease. One thousand four hundred seventy‐three (29.2%) underwent CR, while 3581 (70.8%) did not. Over 5 years follow‐up, CR was associated with a reduced incidence of the primary end point (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.66 [95% CI, 0.51–0.85]), first HF hospitalization (adjusted HR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.49–0.90]) along with all‐cause death and cardiovascular death alone (adjusted HR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.56–0.97] and HR, 0.56 [95% CI, 0.38–0.84], respectively). The results were consistent in the propensity‐score matching population and in inverse probability treatment weighting analysis. The benefit of CR was consistent across acute coronary syndrome presentations (HR, 0.59 [95% CI, 0.39–0.89] for ST‐segment elevation myocardial infarction and HR, 0.71 [95% CI, 0.50–0.99] for non‐ST‐elevation acute coronary syndrome) and in patients with left ventricular ejection fraction >40% (HR, 0.52 [95% CI, 0.37–0.72]), while no benefit was observed in patients with left ventricular ejection fraction ≤40% (HR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.37–1.10], P for interaction 0.04). Conclusions CR after acute coronary syndrome reduced the risk of first hospitalization for HF and cardiovascular death, as well as first HF hospitalization, and cardiovascular and overall death both in patients with ST‐segment elevation myocardial infarction and non‐ST‐elevation acute coronary syndrome. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT 04895176

IncidenCe and predictOrs of heaRt fAiLure after acute coronarY Syndrome: The CORALYS registry

Background: Previous studies investigating predictors of Heart Failure (HF) after acute coronary syndrome (ACS) were mostly conducted during fibrinolytic era or restricted to baseline characteristics and diagnoses prior to admission. We assessed the incidence and predictors of HF hospitalizations among patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for ACS. Methods and results: CORALYS is a multicenter, retrospective, observational registry including consecutive patients treated with PCI for ACS. Patients with known history of HF or reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) were excluded. Incidence of HF hospitalizations was the primary endpoint. The composite of HF hospitalization or cardiovascular death, and cardiovascular and all-cause death were the secondary endpoints. Predictors of HF hospitalizations and the impact of HF hospitalization on cardiovascular and all-cause death were assessed by means of multivariable Cox proportional hazards model.14699 patients were included. After 2.9 ± 1.8 years, the incidence of HF hospitalizations was 12.7%. Multivariable analysis identified age, diabetes, chronic kidney disease, previous myocardial infarction, atrial fibrillation, pulmonary disease, GRACE risk-score ≥ 141, peripheral artery disease, cardiogenic shock at admission and LVEF ≤40% as independently associated with HF hospitalizations. Complete revascularization was associated with a lower risk of HF (HR 0.46,95%CI 0.39-0.55). HF hospitalization was associated with higher risk of CV and all-cause death (HR 1.89,95%CI 1.5-2.39 and HR 1.85,95%CI 1.6-2.14, respectively). Conclusions: Incidence of HF hospitalizations among patients treated with PCI for ACS is not negligible and is associated with detrimental impact on patients' prognosis. Several variables may help to assess the risk of HF after ACS

Forecasting the Risk of Heart Failure Hospitalization After Acute Coronary Syndromes: the CORALYS HF Score

The present study aimed to identify patients at a higher risk of hospitalization for heart failure (HF) in a population of patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) treated with percutaneous coronary revascularization without a history of HF or reduced left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction before the index admission. We performed a Cox regression multivariable analysis with competitive risk and machine learning models on the incideNce and predictOrs of heaRt fAiLure After Acute coronarY Syndrome (CORALYS) registry (NCT04895176), an international and multicenter study including consecutive patients admitted for ACS in 16 European Centers from 2015 to 2020. Of 14,699 patients, 593 (4.0%) were admitted for the development of HF up to 1 year after the index ACS presentation. A total of 2 different data sets were randomly created, 1 for the derivative cohort including 11,626 patients (80%) and 1 for the validation cohort including 3,073 patients (20%). On the Cox regression multivariable analysis, several variables were associated with the risk of HF hospitalization, with reduced renal function, complete revascularization, and LV ejection fraction as the most relevant ones. The area under the curve at 1 year was 0.75 (0.72 to 0.78) in the derivative cohort, whereas on validation, it was 0.72 (0.67 to 0.77). The machine learning analysis showed a slightly inferior performance. In conclusion, in a large cohort of patients with ACS without a history of HF or LV dysfunction before the index event, the CORALYS HF score identified patients at a higher risk of hospitalization for HF using variables easily accessible at discharge. Further approaches to tackle HF development in this high-risk subset of patients are needed