Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Right heart dysfunction after left ventricular assist device implantation: a comparison of the pulsatile HeartMate I and axial-flow HeartMate II devices.
Ann Thorac Surg. 2008 Sep; 86(3):832-40; discussion 832-40.AT

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Right heart dysfunction confers significant morbidity and mortality after left ventricular assist device implantation and historically occurs in as many as a third of patients. It is unknown whether newer axial flow pumps have a different impact on postimplant right heart dysfunction. We compared the incidence of right heart dysfunction after implantation of the pulsatile HeartMate I (XVE) and the continuous flow HeartMate II left ventricular assist device.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent HeartMate I or HeartMate II implantation between June 2000 and March 2007. Right heart dysfunction was defined as inotropic/vasodilator support for 14 or more consecutive days or the need for a right ventricular assist device, or both.

RESULTS

Seventy-seven patients underwent HeartMate implantation; 43 received a HeartMate I and 34 received a HeartMate II, for a mean left ventricular assist device support time of 202 and 160 days, respectively. Operative mortality was lower for HeartMate II patients (28% versus 15%; p = 0.26). The HeartMate II patients had lower preoperative right ventricular stroke work index. Pulmonary vascular resistance index, right ventricular stroke work index, and pulmonary and right atrial pressures improved and were similar between groups postoperatively. Overall, right heart dysfunction developed in 35% of HeartMate I patients (15 of 43) and 41% of HeartMate II patients (14 of 34; p = 0.63). Fewer HeartMate II patients (2) than HeartMate I patients (5) required 7 or more days of epinephrine, whereas more HeartMate II patients (7) than HeartMate I patients (5) required 7 or more days of milrinone. Six HeartMate I and 3 HeartMate II patients required right ventricular assist device implantation for right heart failure. Survival was similar (p = 0.7) between groups at, respectively, 3 (63% versus 62%), 6 (58% versus 58%), and 12 months (49% versus 48%).

CONCLUSIONS

Right heart dysfunction is a persistent clinical problem after left ventricular assist device placement. We report the first study comparing the incidence of right heart dysfunction after HeartMate I versus HeartMate II implantation. Although the incidence of right heart dysfunction was similar, fewer HeartMate II patients required right ventricular assist device placement and fewer required pure inotropic support for right heart failure.

Authors+Show Affiliations

Division of Cardiac Surgery, The Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, Maryland 21287, USA.No affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info available

Pub Type(s)

Comparative Study
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Language

eng

PubMed ID

18721570

Citation

Patel, Nishant D., et al. "Right Heart Dysfunction After Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation: a Comparison of the Pulsatile HeartMate I and Axial-flow HeartMate II Devices." The Annals of Thoracic Surgery, vol. 86, no. 3, 2008, pp. 832-40; discussion 832-40.
Patel ND, Weiss ES, Schaffer J, et al. Right heart dysfunction after left ventricular assist device implantation: a comparison of the pulsatile HeartMate I and axial-flow HeartMate II devices. Ann Thorac Surg. 2008;86(3):832-40; discussion 832-40.
Patel, N. D., Weiss, E. S., Schaffer, J., Ullrich, S. L., Rivard, D. C., Shah, A. S., Russell, S. D., & Conte, J. V. (2008). Right heart dysfunction after left ventricular assist device implantation: a comparison of the pulsatile HeartMate I and axial-flow HeartMate II devices. The Annals of Thoracic Surgery, 86(3), 832-40; discussion 832-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.athoracsur.2008.05.016
Patel ND, et al. Right Heart Dysfunction After Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation: a Comparison of the Pulsatile HeartMate I and Axial-flow HeartMate II Devices. Ann Thorac Surg. 2008;86(3):832-40; discussion 832-40. PubMed PMID: 18721570.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Right heart dysfunction after left ventricular assist device implantation: a comparison of the pulsatile HeartMate I and axial-flow HeartMate II devices. AU - Patel,Nishant D, AU - Weiss,Eric S, AU - Schaffer,Justin, AU - Ullrich,Susan L, AU - Rivard,Dennis C, AU - Shah,Ashish S, AU - Russell,Stuart D, AU - Conte,John V, PY - 2008/01/30/received PY - 2008/04/30/revised PY - 2008/05/05/accepted PY - 2008/8/30/pubmed PY - 2008/9/20/medline PY - 2008/8/30/entrez SP - 832-40; discussion 832-40 JF - The Annals of thoracic surgery JO - Ann Thorac Surg VL - 86 IS - 3 N2 - BACKGROUND: Right heart dysfunction confers significant morbidity and mortality after left ventricular assist device implantation and historically occurs in as many as a third of patients. It is unknown whether newer axial flow pumps have a different impact on postimplant right heart dysfunction. We compared the incidence of right heart dysfunction after implantation of the pulsatile HeartMate I (XVE) and the continuous flow HeartMate II left ventricular assist device. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent HeartMate I or HeartMate II implantation between June 2000 and March 2007. Right heart dysfunction was defined as inotropic/vasodilator support for 14 or more consecutive days or the need for a right ventricular assist device, or both. RESULTS: Seventy-seven patients underwent HeartMate implantation; 43 received a HeartMate I and 34 received a HeartMate II, for a mean left ventricular assist device support time of 202 and 160 days, respectively. Operative mortality was lower for HeartMate II patients (28% versus 15%; p = 0.26). The HeartMate II patients had lower preoperative right ventricular stroke work index. Pulmonary vascular resistance index, right ventricular stroke work index, and pulmonary and right atrial pressures improved and were similar between groups postoperatively. Overall, right heart dysfunction developed in 35% of HeartMate I patients (15 of 43) and 41% of HeartMate II patients (14 of 34; p = 0.63). Fewer HeartMate II patients (2) than HeartMate I patients (5) required 7 or more days of epinephrine, whereas more HeartMate II patients (7) than HeartMate I patients (5) required 7 or more days of milrinone. Six HeartMate I and 3 HeartMate II patients required right ventricular assist device implantation for right heart failure. Survival was similar (p = 0.7) between groups at, respectively, 3 (63% versus 62%), 6 (58% versus 58%), and 12 months (49% versus 48%). CONCLUSIONS: Right heart dysfunction is a persistent clinical problem after left ventricular assist device placement. We report the first study comparing the incidence of right heart dysfunction after HeartMate I versus HeartMate II implantation. Although the incidence of right heart dysfunction was similar, fewer HeartMate II patients required right ventricular assist device placement and fewer required pure inotropic support for right heart failure. SN - 1552-6259 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/18721570/Right_heart_dysfunction_after_left_ventricular_assist_device_implantation:_a_comparison_of_the_pulsatile_HeartMate_I_and_axial_flow_HeartMate_II_devices_ L2 - https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0003-4975(08)01016-3 DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -