Article

Recovery of right heart function with temporary right ventricular assist using a centrifugal pump in patients with severe biventricular failure.

Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Suita, Osaka, Japan.
The Journal of heart and lung transplantation: the official publication of the International Society for Heart Transplantation (Impact Factor: 3.54). 05/2012; 31(8):858-64. DOI: 10.1016/j.healun.2012.03.002
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Long-term outcomes of a biventricular assist device (BiVAD) support are worse than those of an isolated left ventricular assist device (LVAD) support. This study evaluated our strategy for right heart failure using a temporary right VAD (RVAD) with an extracorporeal centrifugal pump.
From January 2001 to December 2010, 108 patients underwent LVAD implantation at our institution and their clinical outcomes were studied.
A temporary centrifugal RVAD was implanted in 26 patients. Multivariate logistic regression revealed pre-operative extracorporeal life support (odds ratio [OR], 37.0), central venous pressure (OR, 1.2), mean pulmonary artery pressure (OR, 0.9), and serum total bilirubin (OR, 1.4) were the risk factors for RVAD requirement. RVAD-off test was conducted, and 11 of the 26 patients showed significant recovery of right heart function and were eventually removed from RVAD support. The survival of patients with isolated LVAD was significantly better than those with a paracorporeal pulsatile BiVAD (80% vs 11% at 1 year, p < 0.001). However, there was no significant difference between the survival of patients who underwent isolated LVAD support and those who were initially implanted with temporary BiVAD but underwent the RVAD removal (80% vs 73% at 1 year, p = 0.827).
Our strategy with temporary RVAD for severe acute right heart failure was effective in selecting the patients who could be weaned from RVAD support. Patient survival was improved by avoiding the long-term support with a paracorporeal pulsatile BiVAD.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
63 Views
  • Anesthesia and analgesia 01/2014; 118(1):69-71. · 3.08 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Acute right ventricular failure (ARVF) refractory to optimal medical management may require rescue therapy with mechanical circulatory support (MCS). The RV exhibits a greater capacity for rapid recovery than the left ventricle, making devices designed specifically for temporary RV MCS attractive. We report our experience with the Impella Right Direct (RD) and Right Peripheral (RP) temporary ventricular assist devices (Abiomed, Danvers, MA) in patients with ARVF. We conducted a retrospective cohort study examining the clinical outcomes of consecutive patients supported with the Impella RD or RP at 2 institutions during a 6-year period. During the study period, 18 patients (67% men; mean age 57 ± 10 years) received MCS, 15 with the Impella RD and 3 with the Impella RP. Before RV MCS, all patients required intravenous inotropes, 7 (39%) required inhaled nitric oxide, 7 (39%) required intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation, and 2 (11%) had experienced a cardiac arrest. Device implantation resulted in an improvement in cardiac index (2.1 ± 0.1 liters/min/m(2) pre-implant vs 2.6 ± 0.2 liters/min/m(2) post-implant, p = 0.04) and reduced central venous pressure (22 ± 5 vs 15 ± 4 mm Hg, p < 0.01). Fourteen (78%) patients recovered sufficient RV function to facilitate device explanation after 7 days (range, 2-19 days) of support, and 4 (22%) patients died on support after 6 days (range 1-11 days). Survival to 30 days was 72% and to 1 year was 50%. At 1-year follow-up, the mean New York Heart Association functional classification was 1.3 ± 0.5, and only 1 patient demonstrated severe RV dysfunction on echocardiography. Most patients with ARVF rapidly recover sufficient RV function to facilitate device explantation, highlighting an expanding role for minimally invasive temporary RV assist devices optimized for the treatment of recoverable ARVF.
    The Journal of heart and lung transplantation: the official publication of the International Society for Heart Transplantation 03/2014; · 3.54 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Extracorporeal VADs are less expensive, their prices reimbursable by the health insurance being about one-sixth of those of implantable VADs in Japan. However, a disadvantage is that, in Japan, their use is restricted to hospitals, necessitating prolonged hospitalization, reducing the patients' quality of life. According to the Japanese registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support, the survival rate does not differ significantly between patients with extracorporeal and implantable VADs. As in Europe and North America, extracorporeal VADs in Japan are commonly used as Bridge to Decision or Bridge to Recovery. Extracorporeal VADs are switched to implantable VADs as a Bridge-to-Bridge strategy after stabilization or when cardiac function recovery fails. They are also used as right ventricular assist devices (RVADs) in patients with right heart failure. A special characteristic of extracorporeal VADs in Japan is their frequent use as a Bridge to Candidacy. In Japan, indications for implantable VADs are restricted to patients registered for heart transplantation. Therefore, in patients who cannot be registered for transplantation because of transient renal dysfunction, etc., due to heart failure, extracorporeal VADs are used first, and then replaced by implantable VADs after transplant registry is done. Here, we describe the current status of extracorporeal VADs in Japan, focusing on the environmental backgrounds, along with a review of the relevant literature.
    Journal of Artificial Organs 06/2014; · 1.41 Impact Factor