Third-generation continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices: a comparative outcome analysis by device type.

AIMS Continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices (CF-LVADs) have become a standard of care in end-stage heart failure. Limited data exist comparing outcomes of HeartMate3 (HM3) and HeartWare HVAD (HW). We aimed to compare midterm outcomes of these devices. METHODS AND RESULTS Investigator-initiated retrospective-observational comparative analysis of all patients who underwent primary LVAD implantation of either HM3 or HW at our centre between January 2010 and December 2020. Data were derived from a prospective registry. Primary endpoints were all-cause mortality and heart transplantation. Secondary endpoints included device-related major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events, which included major bleeding, major neurological dysfunction (defined as persisting neurological impairment for ≥24 h), device-related major infection (excluding driveline infections), major device malfunctions leading to re-intervention or partial device exchange (pump failure, outflow-graft twist or failure, controller failure, battery failure, patient cable failure, but excluding pump thrombosis), and pump thrombosis. Further secondary endpoints included right heart failure, gastrointestinal bleeding, driveline infections, and surgical re-interventions. The secondary outcomes were analysed not only for the first event but also for recurrent events. The analysis included competing risks analysis and recurrent event regression analysis, with adjustment for confounders age, gender, body mass index (BMI), and Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support (INTERMACS) level. Out of 106 primary CF-LVAD implantations, 36 (34%) received HM3 and 70 (66%) received HW. Median follow-up was 1.48 years [interquartile range 0.67, 2.41]. HM3 was more often implanted in men (91.7% vs. 72.9%, P = 0.024); patients were older (median 61 years [54, 66.5] vs. 52.5 years [43, 60], P < 0.001), had a higher BMI (median 26.7 kg/m2 [23.4, 29.0] vs. 24.3 kg/m2 [20.7, 27.4], P = 0.013), had more comorbidities, and were more likely targeted for destination therapy (36.1% vs. 14.3%, P = 0.010). Death occurred in 33.3% of HM3 patients, compared with 22.9% of HW patients, P = 0.247 (probability of survival at 4 years, 54.7% vs. 74.1%, P = 0.296). After adjustment for confounders, we observed a significant six-fold risk increase in device malfunctions for HW [hazard ratio (HR) 6.49, 95% confidence interval (CI) [1.89, 22.32], P = 0.003], but no significant differences in pump thrombosis (P = 0.173) or overall survival (P = 0.801). CONCLUSIONS Comparing midterm outcomes between HM3 and HW for LVAD support from a prospective registry, HW patients had a significantly higher risk of device malfunctions. No significant differences were evident between devices in overall survival and in respect to most outcomes

Propensity score-based analysis of long-term follow-up in patients supported with durable centrifugal left ventricular assist devices:the EUROMACS analysis

OBJECTIVES: The HeartWare HVAD (HW) and the HeartMate3 (HM3) are presently the most commonly used continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices worldwide. We compared the outcomes of patients supported with either of these 2 devices based on data from the EUROMACS (European Registry for Patients with Mechanical Circulatory Support). METHODS: A retrospective analysis of the survival and complications profile in propensity score-matched adult patients enrolled in the EUROMACS between 01 January 2016 and 01 September 2020 and supported with either an HW or HM3. Matching included demographic parameters, severity of cardiogenic shock and risk-modifying end-organ parameters that impact long-term survival. Survival on device and major postoperative adverse events were analysed. RESULTS: Following 1:1 propensity score matching, each group consisted of 361 patients. Patients were well balanced (<0.1 standardized mean difference). The median follow-up was similar in both groups [396 (interquartile range (IQR) 112-771) days for HW and 376 (IQR 100-816) days for HM3]. The 2-year survival was similar in both groups [HW: 61% 95% confidence interval (CI) (56-67%) vs HM3: 68% 95% CI (63-73%) (stratified hazard ratio for mortality: 1.13 95% CI (0.83-1.54), P = 0.435].The cumulative incidence for combined major adverse events and unexpected readmissions was similar in both groups [subdistribution hazard ratio (SHR) 1.0 (0.84-1.21), P = 0.96]. Patients in the HW group demonstrated a higher risk of device malfunction [SHR 2.44 (1.45-3.71), P < 0.001], neurological dysfunction [SHR 1.29 (1.02-1.61), P = 0.032] and intracranial bleeding [SHR 1.76 (1.13-2.70), P = 0.012]. CONCLUSIONS: Mid-term survival in both groups was similar in a propensity-matched analysis. The risk of device malfunction, neurological dysfunction and intracranial bleeding was significantly higher in HW patients

Causes and predictors of early mortality in patients treated with left ventricular assist device implantation in the European Registry of Mechanical Circulatory Support (EUROMACS)

Purpose: The aim of the study was to analyze early mortality after continuous-flow left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation which remains high. Methods: We analyzed consecutive (n = 2689) patients from the European Registry for Patients with Mechanical Circulatory Support (EUROMACS) undergoing continuous-flow LVAD implantation. The primary outcome was early (< 90 days) mortality. Secondary outcomes were differential causes of early post-operative death following LVAD implantation. Results: Univariable and multivariable analysis as well as regression analysis were used to examine determinants and differential causes of early (< 90 days) mortality after LVAD implantation. During the first 90 days, 2160 (80%) patients were alive with ongoing LVAD support, 40(2%) patients underwent heart transplantation, and 487(18%) deceased. The main causes of early death were MOF (36%), sepsis (28%), cardiopulmonary failure (CPF; 10%), CVA (9%), and right-sided heart failure (RHF, 8%). Furthermore, MOF and sepsis are 70% of causes of death in the first week. Independent clinical predictors of early death were age, female sex, INTERMACS profile 1 to 3, and ECMO. Laboratory predictors included elevated serum creatinine, total bilirubin, lactate, and low hemoglobin. Furthermore, hemodynamic predictors included elevated RA-to-PCWP ratio, pulmonary vascular resistance, and low systemic vascular resistance. Longer total implantation time was also independent predictor of early mortality. A simple model of 12 variables predicts early mortality following LVAD implantation with a good discriminative power with area under the curve of 0.75. Conclusions: In the EUROMACS registry, approximately one out of five patients die within 90 days after LVAD implantation. Early mortality is primarily dominated by multiorgan failure followed by sepsis. A simple model identifies important parameters which are associated with early mortality following LVAD implantation

The European Registry for Patients with Mechanical Circulatory Support (EUROMACS)

OBJECTIVES: A second paediatric report has been generated from the European Registry for Patients with Mechanical Circulatory Support (EUROMACS). The purpose of EUROMACS, which is operated by the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery, is to gather data related to durable mechanical circulatory support for scientific purposes and to publish reports with respect to the course of mechanical circulatory support therapy. Since the first report issued, efforts to increase compliance and participation have been extended. Additionally, the data provided the opportunity to analyse patients of younger age and lower weight. METHODS: Participating hospitals contributed pre-, peri- and long-term postoperative data on mechanical circulatory support implants to the registry. Data for all implants in paediatric patients (≤19 years of age) performed from 1 January 2000 to 1 July 2019 were analysed. This report includes updates of patient characteristics, implant frequency, outcome (including mortality rates, transplants and recovery rates) as well as adverse events including neurological dysfunction, device malfunction, major infection and bleeding. RESULTS: Twenty-nine hospitals contributed 398 registered implants in 353 patients (150 female, 203 male) to the registry. The most frequent aetiology of heart failure was any form of cardiomyopathy (61%), followed by congenital heart disease and myocarditis (16.4% and 16.1%, respectively). Competing outcomes analysis revealed that a total of 80% survived to transplant or recovery or are ongoing; at the 2-year follow-up examination, 20% died while on support. At 12 months, 46.7% received transplants, 8.7% were weaned from their device and 18.5% died. The 3-month adverse events rate was 1.69 per patient-year for device malfunction including pump exchange, 0.48 for major bleeding, 0.64 for major infection and 0.78 for neurological events. CONCLUSIONS: The overall survival rate was 81.5% at 12 months following ventricular assist device implant. The comparison of survival rates of the early and later eras shows no significant difference. A focus on specific subgroups showed that survival was less in patients of younger age (<1 year of age) (P = 0.01) and lower weight (<20 kg) (P = 0.015). Transplant rates at 6 months contin

The European Registry for Patients with Mechanical Circulatory Support of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery:third report

OBJECTIVES: In the third report of the European Registry for Patients with Mechanical Circulatory Support of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery, outcomes of patients receiving mechanical circulatory support are reviewed in relation to implant era. METHODS: Procedures in adult patients (January 2011-June 2020) were included. Patients from centres with 3 months). Risk factors for death were explored using univariable Cox regression with a stepwise time-varying hazard ratio (3 months). RESULTS: In total, 4834 procedures in 4486 individual patients (72 hospitals) were included, with a median follow-up of 1.1 (interquartile range: 0.3-2.6) years. The annual number of implants (range: 346-600) did not significantly change (P = 0.41). Both Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support class (classes 4-7: 23, 25 and 33%; P 3 months: 0.45). Bilirubin and creatinine levels were significant risk factors in the early phase but not in the late phase after the implant. CONCLUSIONS: In its 10 years of existence, EUROMACS has become a point of reference enabling benchmarking and outcome monitoring. Patient characteristics and outcomes changed between implant eras. In addition, both occurrence of outcomes and risk factor weights are time dependent

Myocardial recovery in children supported with a durable ventricular assist device-a systematic review

OBJECTIVES A small percentage of paediatric patients supported with a ventricular assist device (VAD) can have their device explanted following myocardial recovery. The goal of this systematic review is to summarize the current literature on the clinical course in these children after weaning. METHODS A systematic literature search was performed on 27 May 2022 using Embase, Medline ALL, Web of Science Core Collection, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Google Scholar to include all literature on paediatric patients supported by a durable VAD during the last decade. Overlapping study cohorts and registry-based studies were filtered out. RESULTS Thirty-seven articles were included. Eighteen of them reported on the incidence of recovery in cohort studies, with an overall incidence rate of 8.7% (81/928). Twenty-two of the included articles reported on clinical outcomes after VAD explantation (83 patients). The aetiologies varied widely and were not limited to diseases with a natural transient course like myocarditis. Most of the patients in the included studies (70; 84.3%) were supported by a Berlin Heart EXCOR, and in 66.3% (55/83), only the left ventricle had to be supported. The longest follow-up period was 19.1 years, and multiple studies reported on long-term myocardial recovery. Fewer than half of the reported deaths had a cardiac cause. CONCLUSIONS Myocardial recovery during VAD support is dependent on various contributing components. The interactions among patient-, device-, time- and hospital-related factors are complex and not yet fully understood. Long-term recovery after VAD support is achievable, even after a long duration of VAD support, and even in patients with aetiologies different from myocarditis or post-cardiotomy heart failure. More research is needed on this favourable outcome after VAD support

The European Registry for Patients with Mechanical Circulatory Support of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery: third report

Objectives: In the third report of the European Registry for Patients with Mechanical Circulatory Support of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery, outcomes of patients receiving mechanical circulatory support are reviewed in relation to implant era. Methods: Procedures in adult patients (January 2011-June 2020) were included. Patients from centres with 3 months). Risk factors for death were explored using univariable Cox regression with a stepwise time-varying hazard ratio (3 months). Results: In total, 4834 procedures in 4486 individual patients (72 hospitals) were included, with a median follow-up of 1.1 (interquartile range: 0.3-2.6) years. The annual number of implants (range: 346-600) did not significantly change (P = 0.41). Both Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support class (classes 4-7: 23, 25 and 33%; P 3 months: 0.45). Bilirubin and creatinine levels were significant risk factors in the early phase but not in the late phase after the implant. Conclusions: In its 10 years of existence, EUROMACS has become a point of reference enabling benchmarking and outcome monitoring. Patient characteristics and outcomes changed between implant eras. In addition, both occurrence of outcomes and risk factor weights are time dependent. Keywords: End-stage heart failure; Mechanical circulatory support; Registry; Ventricular assist devic

The European Registry for Patients with Mechanical Circulatory Support of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery: third report

OBJECTIVES In the third report of the European Registry for Patients with Mechanical Circulatory Support of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery, outcomes of patients receiving mechanical circulatory support are reviewed in relation to implant era. METHODS Procedures in adult patients (January 2011-June 2020) were included. Patients from centres with 3 months). Risk factors for death were explored using univariable Cox regression with a stepwise time-varying hazard ratio (3 months). RESULTS In total, 4834 procedures in 4486 individual patients (72 hospitals) were included, with a median follow-up of 1.1 (interquartile range: 0.3-2.6) years. The annual number of implants (range: 346-600) did not significantly change (P = 0.41). Both Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support class (classes 4-7: 23, 25 and 33%; P < 0.001) and in-hospital deaths (18.5, 17.2 and 11.2; P < 0.001) decreased significantly between eras. Overall, mortality, transplants and the probability of weaning were 55, 25 and 2% at 5 years after the implant, respectively. Major infections were mainly noted early after the implant occurred (AER(3 months): 0.45). Bilirubin and creatinine levels were significant risk factors in the early phase but not in the late phase after the implant. CONCLUSIONS In its 10 years of existence, EUROMACS has become a point of reference enabling benchmarking and outcome monitoring. Patient characteristics and outcomes changed between implant eras. In addition, both occurrence of outcomes and risk factor weights are time dependent. As a registry of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery, the European Registry for Patients with Mechanical Circulatory Support (EUROMACS) offers a robust repository of clinical data on long-term mechanical circulatory support (MCS) from a large international community.European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS)This work was funded and supported by European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS)

The European Registry for Patients with Mechanical Circulatory Support (EUROMACS): first EUROMACS Paediatric (Paedi-EUROMACS) report (vol 54, pg 800, 2018)

Loforte, Antonio/0000-0002-3689-0477WOS: 000537384900041PubMed: 32324241[No abstract available

Propensity score-based analysis of long-term follow-up in patients supported with durable centrifugal left ventricular assist devices: the EUROMACS analysis

OBJECTIVES: The HeartWare HVAD (HW) and the HeartMate3 (HM3) are presently the most commonly used continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices worldwide. We compared the outcomes of patients supported with either of these 2 devices based on data from the EUROMACS (European Registry for Patients with Mechanical Circulatory Support). METHODS: A retrospective analysis of the survival and complications profile in propensity score-matched adult patients enrolled in the EUROMACS between 01 January 2016 and 01 September 2020 and supported with either an HW or HM3. Matching included demographic parameters, severity of cardiogenic shock and risk-modifying end-organ parameters that impact long-term survival. Survival on device and major postoperative adverse events were analysed. RESULTS: Following 1:1 propensity score matching, each group consisted of 361 patients. Patients were well balanced (<0.1 standardized mean difference). The median follow-up was similar in both groups [396 (interquartile range (IQR) 112-771) days for HW and 376 (IQR 100-816) days for HM3]. The 2-year survival was similar in both groups [HW: 61% 95% confidence interval (CI) (56-67%) vs HM3: 68% 95% CI (63-73%) (stratified hazard ratio for mortality: 1.13 95% CI (0.83-1.54), P=0.435].The cumulative incidence for combined major adverse events and unexpected readmissions was similar in both groups [subdistribution hazard ratio (SHR) 1.0 (0.84-1.21), P=0.96]. Patients in the HW group demonstrated a higher risk of device malfunction [SHR 2.44 (1.45-3.71), P<0.001], neurological dysfunction [SHR 1.29 (1.02-1.61), P=0.032] and intracranial bleeding [SHR 1.76 (1.13-2.70), P=0.012]. CONCLUSIONS: Mid-term survival in both groups was similar in a propensity-matched analysis. The risk of device malfunction, neurological dysfunction and intracranial bleeding was significantly higher in HW patients