Dataset Information

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

ABSTRACT:

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.

SUBMITTER: Schibilsky D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5373529 | biostudies-literature | 2017

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

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

Schibilsky David D Haller Christoph C Lange Bruno B Schibilsky Barbara B Haeberle Helene H Seizer Peter P Gawaz Meinrad M Rosenberger Peter P Walker Tobias T Schlensak Christian C

PloS one 20170330 3

<h4>Background</h4>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.<h4>Methods & results</h4>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 pr ...[more]

PMID: 28358849

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesThis study examined patient outcomes after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation across a range of center surgical volumes.BackgroundIn order for a center to qualify for reimbursement, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) requires it to implant ≥10 LVADs or total artificial hearts over a 3-year period. The impact of center LVAD surgical volumes on patient outcomes has not been thoroughly scrutinized.MethodsCenter volumes were provided for 7,416 patients undergoing LVAD implantation who were enrolled in INTERMACS (Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support). Center LVAD volume was categorized as either very low (≤10 implants/year, n = 617), low (11 to 30 implants/year, n = 2,561), medium (31 to 50 implants/year, n = 2,458), or high (>50 implants/year, n = 1,750). The main outcome of interest was patient survival based on center volume derived from Kaplan-Meier and multivariate Cox regression.ResultsOverall survival was associated with center volume (p = 0.003), as follows: 71 ± 1.8% (very low volume), 81 ± 0.8% (low volume), 83 ± 0.8% (medium volume), and 79 ± 1.0% (high volume) at 1 year. Compared with medium volume centers, the 90-day mortality was higher in very low volume (odds ratio [OR]: 1.35; p = 0.04) and high volume (OR: 1.28; p = 0.018) VAD centers. The adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for mortality were 1.32 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.11 to 1.56), 1.07 (95% CI: 0.95 to 1.21), and 1.17 (95% CI: 1.03 to 1.30) for very low, low, and high volume centers, respectively. Center volume did not predict mortality (p = 0.25; n = 3,688) in INTERMACS profile 1 patients (patients who had sustained cardiogenic shock) and profile 2 patients (patients with progressive hemodynamic decline despite inotropes).ConclusionsCenter volume correlates with post-VAD survival, with worse survival noted at very-low volume centers. These findings suggest that current U.S. VAD center standards warrant reconsideration.

Project description:Background Factors related to health-related quality of life (HRQOL) 2 years after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation are unknown. We sought to determine whether preimplant intended goal of LVAD therapy (heart transplant candidate [short-term group], uncertain heart transplant candidate [uncertain group], and heart transplant ineligible [long-term group]) and other variables were related to HRQOL 2 years after LVAD implantation. Methods and Results Our LVAD sample (n=1620) was from INTERMACS (Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support). Using the EuroQol-5 Dimension Questionnaire (EQ-5D-3L), a generic HRQOL measure, and the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ-12), a heart failure-specific HRQOL measure, multivariable linear regression modeling was conducted with the EQ-5D-3L Visual Analog Scale (VAS) score and KCCQ-12 overall summary score (OSS) as separate dependent variables. Two years after LVAD implant, the short-term group had a significantly higher mean VAS score versus the uncertain and long-term groups (short-term: 75.18 [SD, 20.62]; uncertain: 72.27 [SD, 20.33]; long-term: 70.87 [SD, 22.09], P=0.01); differences were not clinically meaningful. Two-year mean scores did not differ by group for the KCCQ-12 OSS (short-term, 67.85 [SD, 20.61]; uncertain, 67.79 [SD, 19.31]; long-term, 67.08 [SD, 21.49], P=0.80). Factors associated with a worse VAS score 2 years postoperatively (n=1205) included not working; not having a short-term LVAD; and postoperative neurological dysfunction, greater health-related stress, coping poorly, less VAD self-care confidence, and less satisfaction with VAD surgery, explaining 28% of variance (P<0.001). Factors associated with a worse KCCQ-12 OSS 2 years postoperatively (n=1250) included not working; history of high body mass index and diabetes mellitus; and postoperative renal dysfunction, greater health-related stress, coping poorly, less VAD self-care confidence, less satisfaction with VAD surgery, and regret regarding VAD implantation, accounting for 36% of variance (P<0.001). Conclusions Factors related to HRQOL 2 years after LVAD implantation include demographic, clinical, and psychological variables.

Dataset Information

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

Background

Methods & results

Conclusion

Publications

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

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure