Low Operative Mortality With Implantation of a Continuous-Flow Left Ventricular Assist Device and Impact of Concurrent Cardiac Procedures
- 15 September 2009
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wolters Kluwer Health in Circulation
- Vol. 120 (11_suppl_1) , S215-S219
- https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.108.844274
Abstract
Background— The objective of this study was to determine the impact of concurrent cardiac procedures (CCP) on patient outcomes after HeartMate II (HMII) left ventricular assist device implantation. Methods and Results— Two hundred eighty-one patients underwent implantation of a HMII as a bridge to transplantation from March 2005 to March 2007. One hundred seventy patients had an HMII implanted only, and 81 patients underwent concurrent cardiac procedures in conjunction with HMII implantation (HMII+CCP). Of these, 47 patients had concurrent valvular procedures, 15 patients had simultaneous closure of patent foramen ovale, and 19 patients had other various cardiac procedures. Patients requiring right ventricular assist device support or noncardiac procedures were excluded. Preoperative characteristics were similar for patients with and without concurrent cardiac procedures. Overall 30-day mortality was 5.8% for the HMII group and 11.3% for the HMII+CCP group. Subgroup analysis demonstrated that simultaneous patent foramen ovale closure was not associated with an increased 30-day mortality rate, but concurrent valvular procedures increased the risk to 8.5%. Patients who underwent an aortic valve procedure had a 30-day mortality rate of 25%, higher than for isolated concurrent mitral (0%) or tricuspid repair (3.3%). Survival at 180 days was 87% for HMII alone and 80% for HMII+CCP. The hazard ratio for concurrent cardiac procedures adjusted for baseline parameters was 1.82 (95% CI, 1.07 to 3.10, P =0.026). Conclusions— There is a low 5.8% operative mortality rate for patients requiring uncomplicated HMII implantation, with no apparent increased risk for concurrent patent foramen ovale closure or mitral or tricuspid repair. However, concurrent aortic valve and other cardiac procedures are associated with significantly decreased perioperative and long-term survival.Keywords
This publication has 12 references indexed in Scilit:
- Extended Mechanical Circulatory Support With a Continuous-Flow Rotary Left Ventricular Assist DevicePublished by Elsevier ,2009
- Long-term Outcomes and Costs of Ventricular Assist Devices Among Medicare BeneficiariesJAMA, 2008
- Current Axial-Flow Devices—the HeartMate II and Jarvik 2000 Left Ventricular Assist DevicesSeminars in Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, 2008
- Use of a Continuous-Flow Device in Patients Awaiting Heart TransplantationNew England Journal of Medicine, 2007
- Outcomes of Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation as Destination Therapy in the Post-REMATCH EraCirculation, 2007
- Management of Aortic Insufficiency With Continuous Flow Left Ventricular Assist Devices: Bioprosthetic Valve ReplacementThe Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation, 2006
- Native Aortic Valve Insufficiency in Patients With Left Ventricular Assist DevicesThe Annals of Thoracic Surgery, 2006
- HeartMate® II left ventricular assist device: a new device for advanced heart failureExpert Review of Medical Devices, 2005
- Multicenter clinical evaluation of the HeartMate vented electric left ventricular assist system in patients awaiting heart transplantationThe Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, 2001
- Influence of Longer Term Left Ventricular Assist Device Support on Valvular RegurgitationAsaio Journal, 1994