Physical preconditioning on biventricular temporary mechanical circulatory support while awaiting heart transplantation.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Stegmann A
PROVIDER: S-EPMC11249966 | biostudies-literature | 2024 Jun
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Physical preconditioning on biventricular temporary mechanical circulatory support while awaiting heart transplantation.
Stegmann Anna A Yeter Ruhi R Knosalla Christoph C Lanmüller Pia P
Interdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery 20240601 6
Temporary mechanical circulatory support (tMCS) is increasingly used in patients with cardiogenic shock as a bridge to further treatment. We present the case of a 52-year-old female patient with biventricular heart failure who was bridged to heart transplantation employing biventricular tMCS through a non-femoral access. The 'groin-free' tMCS concept facilitates pre-habilitation while awaiting heart transplantation. ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundThe 2018 U.S. heart allocation system offers an accelerated pathway for heart transplantation to the most urgent patients.ObjectivesThis study sought to determine whether the new allocation system resulted in lower likelihood of candidate recovery.MethodsAdult patients waitlisted for heart transplantation with temporary mechanical circulatory support at the time of initial listing between 2010 and 2020 in the United Network for Organ Sharing registry were included. Competing events of heart transplantation, waitlist death or delisting for deteriorating condition, and delisting for improved condition (candidate recovery) were analyzed in the new vs old heart allocation system.ResultsA total of 688 patients were waitlisted with venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation or a surgical nondischargeable biventricular assist device (status 1 or old 1A). Overall, 2,237 patients were waitlisted with an intra-aortic balloon pump, a percutaneous left ventricular assist device (LVAD), or a surgical nondischargeable LVAD (status 2 or old 1A). Patients waitlisted with venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation or a nondischargeable biventricular assist device had significantly shorter median waitlist times (5 vs 31 days), higher incidence for cardiac transplantation (81.5% vs 43.0%), and lower incidence of candidate recovery (1.5% vs 7.9%) in the new vs old heart allocation system (all P < 0.05). Patients waitlisted with an intra-aortic balloon pump or percutaneous or a nondischargeable LVAD also had significantly shorter median waitlist times (8 vs 35 days), higher incidence of transplantation (88.9% vs 64.9%), and lower incidence of candidate recovery (0.2% vs 1.6%) in the new vs old heart allocation system (all P < 0.05).ConclusionsCurrent practice of the new allocation system may not offer select temporary mechanical circulatory support patients the opportunity and adequate time to recover to the point of waitlist removal. Further research will determine which patients would benefit from urgent transplantation vs recovery strategy.
| S-EPMC8928585 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Cardiogenic shock (CS) is a challenging syndrome, associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Although pharmacological therapies are successful and can successfully control this acute cardiac illness, some patients remain refractory to drugs. Therefore, a more aggressive treatment strategy is needed. Temporary mechanical circulatory support (TCS) can be used to stabilise patients with decompensated heart failure. In the last two decades, the increased use of TCS has led to several kinds of devices becoming available. However, indications for TCS and device selection are part of a complex process. It is necessary to evaluate the severity of CS, any early and prompt haemodynamic resuscitation, prior TCS, specific patient risk factors, technical limitations and adequacy of resources and training, as well as an assessment of whether care would be futile. This article examines options for commonly used TCS devices, including intra-aortic balloon pumps, a pulsatile percutaneous ventricular assist device (the iVAC), veno-arterial extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation and Impella (Abiomed) and TandemHeart (LivaNova) percutaneous ventricular assist device.
| S-EPMC7111303 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Dr. O.P. Yadava, CEO and Chief Cardiac Surgeon, National Heart Institute, New Delhi, India, and Editor-in-Chief, Indian Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, in conversation with Dr. Vivek Rao, Chief of Cardiovascular Surgery, Peter Munk Cardiac Centre, University of Toronto, discusses donation after circulatory death, role of pulsatility in mechanical circulatory support (MCS) and current status of MCS versus heart transplant as a destination therapy.
| S-EPMC7538495 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesThis analysis sought to investigate the waitlist and post-transplant outcomes of individuals bridged to transplantation by using temporary percutaneous endovascular mechanical circulatory support (tMCS) through a status 2 designation (cardiogenic shock and exception).BackgroundThe 2018 donor heart allocation policy change granted a status 2 designation to patients supported with tMCS.MethodsAdult patients in the United Network for Organ Sharing registry after October 18, 2018 who received a status 2 designation for tMCS were included and grouped by their status 2 criteria: cardiogenic shock with hemodynamic criteria (CS-HD), cardiogenic shock without hemodynamic criteria before tMCS (CS-woHD), and exception. Baseline characteristics, waitlist events (death and delisting), and post-transplant outcomes were compared.ResultsA total of 2,279 patients met inclusion criteria: 68.6% (n = 1,564) with CS-HD, 3.2% (n = 73) with CS-woHD, and 28.2% (n = 642) with exceptions. A total of 64.2% of patients underwent heart transplantation within 14 days of status 2 listing or upgrade, and 1.9% died or were delisted for worsening clinical condition. Among the 35.8% who did not undergo transplantation following 14 days, only 2.8% went on to receive a left ventricular assist device (LVAD). The 30-day transplantation likelihood was similar among groups: 80.1% for the CS-HD group vs 79.7% for the exception group vs 73.3% for the CS-woHD group; P = 0.31. However, patients who met criteria for CS-woHD had 2.3-fold greater risk of death or delisting (95% CI: 1.10-4.75; P = 0.03) compared with CS-HD patients after multivariable adjustment. Pre-tMCS hemodynamics were not associated with adverse waitlist events.ConclusionsThe use of tMCS is an efficient, safe, and effective strategy as a bridge to transplantation; however, patients with CS-woHD may represent a high-risk cohort. Transition to a durable LVAD was a rare event in this group.
| S-EPMC8724562 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: Existing prediction models for post-transplant mortality in patients bridged to heart transplantation with temporary mechanical circulatory support (tMCS) perform poorly. A more reliable model would allow clinicians to provide better pre-operative risk assessment and develop more targeted therapies for high-risk patients. Methods: We identified adult patients in the United Network for Organ Sharing database undergoing isolated heart transplantation between 01/2009 and 12/2017 who were supported with tMCS at the time of transplant. We constructed a machine learning model using extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost) with a 70:30 train:test split to predict 1-year post-operative mortality. All pre-transplant variables available in the UNOS database were included to train the model. Shapley Additive Explanations was used to identify and interpret the most important features for XGBoost predictions. Results: A total of 1584 patients were included, with a median age of 56 (interquartile range: 46-62) and 74% male. Actual 1-year mortality was 12.1%. Out of 498 available variables, 43 were selected for the final model. The area under the receiver operator characteristics curve (AUC) for the XGBoost model was 0.71 (95% CI: 0.62-0.78). The most important variables predictive of 1-year mortality included recipient functional status, age, pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP), cardiac output, ECMO usage, and serum creatinine. Conclusions: An interpretable machine learning model trained on a large clinical database demonstrated good performance in predicting 1-year mortality for patients bridged to heart transplantation with tMCS. Machine learning may be used to enhance clinician judgement in the care of markedly high-risk transplant recipients.
| S-EPMC9500687 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThere are few reports of mechanical circulatory support (MCS) in patients with cardiogenic shock (CS) due to end-stage heart failure (ESHF). We evaluated our institutional MCS strategy and compared the outcomes of INTERMACS 1 and 2 patients with CS due to ESHF.MethodsRetrospective analysis of prospectively collected data (November 2014 to July 2019) from a single centre. ESHF was defined by a diagnosis of HF prior to presentation with CS. Other causes of CS (eg: acute myocardial infarction) were excluded. We compared the clinical course, complications and 90-day survival of patients with CS due to ESHF in INTERMACS profile 1 and 2.ResultsWe included 60 consecutive patients with CS due to ESHF Differences in baseline characteristics were consistent with the INTERMACS profiles. The duration of MCS was similar between INTERMACS 1 and 2 patients (14 (10-33) vs 15 (7-23) days, p = 0.439). There was no significant difference in the number of patients with complications that required intervention. Compared to INTERMACS 2, INTERMACS 1 patients had more organ dysfunction on support and significant lower 90-day survival (66% vs 34%, p = 0.016).ConclusionOur temporary MCS strategy, including earlier intervention in patients with CS due to ESHF at INTERMACS 2 was associated with less organ dysfunction and better 90-day survival compared to INTERMACS 1 patients.
| S-EPMC9125436 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimPatients with advanced heart failure (HF) frequently suffer from renal insufficiency. The impact of durable mechanical circulatory support (MCS) and subsequent heart transplantation (HTx) on kidney function is not well described.Methods and resultsWe studied patients with advanced HF who received durable MCS as bridge to transplantation (BTT) and underwent subsequent HTx at our centre between 1996 and 2018. Glomerular filtration rate (GFR) was measured by 51 Cr-EDTA or iohexol clearance during heart failure work-up; 3-6 months after MCS; and 1 year after HTx. Chronic kidney disease (CKD) was classified according to KDIGO criteria based on estimated GFR. A total of 88 patients (46 ± 15 years, 84% male) were included, 63% with non-ischaemic heart disease. The median duration of MCS-treatment was 172 (IQR 116-311) days, and 81 subjects were alive 1 year after HTx. Measured GFR increased from 54 ± 19 during HF work-up to 60 ± 16 mL/min/1.73 m2 after MCS (P < 0.001) and displayed a slight but nonsignificant decrease to 57 ± 22 mL/min/1.73 m2 1 year after HTx (P = 0.38). The trajectory of measured GFR did not differ between pulsatile and continuous flow (CF) pumps. Among patients 35-49 years and those who were treated in the most recent era (2012-2018), measured GFR increased following MCS implantation and subsequent HTx. Estimated GFR displayed a similar course as did measured GFR.ConclusionsIn patients with advanced heart failure, measured GFR improved after MCS with no difference between pulsatile and CF-pumps. The total study group showed no further increase in GFR following HTx, but in certain subgroups, including patients aged 35-54 years and those treated during the latest era (2012-2018), renal function appeared to improve after transplant.
| S-EPMC9288773 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesWe sought to determine utilization and outcomes of perioperative temporary mechanical circulatory support (tMCS) in the current practice of cardiac surgery.BackgroundtMCS is an evolving adjunct to cardiac surgery not fully characterized in contemporary practice.MethodsUsing the nationwide inpatient sample we retrospectively analyzed hospital discharge data between January 1, 2016 and December 31, 2019. ICD-10-CM procedure codes were used to identify and divide patient hospitalizations into those who had preoperative tMCS (pre-tMCS) versus tMCS instituted the day of surgery or afterwards (sd/post-tMCS).ResultsIn all, 1,383,520 hospitalizations met inclusion criteria. 86,445 (6.25%) had tMCS. tMCS was utilized in 8.74% of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), 2.58% of isolated valve, and 9.71% of valve/CABG; operations. 29,325 (33.9%) had pre-tMCS while 57,120 (66.1%) had sd/post-tMCS. The use of tMCS was associated with greater inpatient mortality (15.66% vs. 1.53%, p < .001), longer length of stay (LOS) (14.4 vs. 8.5 days, p < .001), and higher mean inflation-adjusted costs ($93,040 ± 1038 vs. $51,358 ± 296, p < .001) compared to no use. Inpatient mortality (5.98% vs. 20.63%, p < .001), LOS (13.87 vs. 14.68, p < .001), and cost ($82,621 ± 1152 SEM vs. $98,381 ± 1242) were all significantly lower with pre-tMCS compared to sd/post tMCS. When analyzed separately, mortality was higher with later utilization of tMCS (5.98% pre, 17.1% sd, and 49.05% postsurgical date insertion, p < .001).ConclusionsPerioperative tMCS is utilized in 6.25% of modern cardiac surgery, with two-thirds of cases instituted on the day of surgery or afterwards. The use of tMCS is associated with significantly higher mortality, longer LOS, and higher costs. Among patients undergoing tMCS, earlier utilization is associated with better outcomes.
| S-EPMC10092004 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTemporary mechanical circulatory support (tMCS) may be necessary to treat low cardiac output syndrome after mitral valve surgery (MVS) for chronic severe mitral regurgitation (MR). However, prevalence and predictors remain undetermined.MethodsThis single-center retrospective cohort study included 443 patients who underwent primary MVS for degenerative, ischemic, or functional MR between January 2013 and June 2023. Patients requiring tMCS intraoperatively or postoperatively were compared with patients who did not require tMCS. Multivariable logistic regression identified independent risk factors for tMCS requirement.ResultstMCS was required in 12 of 443 patients (2.7%), with degenerative (2.1%), functional (1.8%), and ischemic (8.3%) MR. Independent risk factors for tMCS requirement were preoperative left ventricular ejection fraction <50% (odds ratio, 4.94; P = .01) and mitral valve replacement (odds ratio, 5.85; P = .005). MR type was not independently influential. The 30-day mortality was 41.7% (5 of 12) in the tMCS group vs 3.5% (15 of 431) in the non-tMCS group (P < .0001).ConclusionsRequirements for tMCS after MVS for MR are infrequent, but tMCS is associated with high mortality. Low preoperative left ventricular ejection fraction and mitral valve replacement are independent risk factors, thus suggesting that careful surgical planning and meticulous postoperative monitoring are warranted in high-risk cases.
| S-EPMC11910766 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7213962 | biostudies-literature