No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
An Urban 911 System’s Experience with Left Ventricular Assist Device Patients
Abstract
Background: Left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) are used with increasing frequency and left in place for longer periods of time. Prior publications have focused on the mechanics of troubleshooting the device itself. We aim to describe the epidemiology of LVAD patient presentations to emergency medical services (EMS), prehospital assessments and interventions, and hospital outcomes.
Methods: This is a retrospective chart review of known LVAD patients belonging to a single academic center’s heart failure program who activated the 9-1-1 system and were transported by an urban EMS system to one of the center’s two emergency departments between January 2012 and December 2015. Identifying demographics were used to query the electronic medical record of the responding city fire agency and contracted transporting ambulance service. Two reviewers abstracted prehospital chief complaint, vital signs, assessments, and interventions. Emergency department and hospital outcomes were retrieved separately.
Results: From January 2012 to December 2015, 15 LVAD patients were transported 16 times. The most common prehospital chief complaint was weakness (7/16), followed by chest pain (3/16). Of the seven patients presenting with weakness, one was diagnosed with a stroke in the emergency department. Another patient was diagnosed with subarachnoid hemorrhage and expired during hospital admission. This was the only death in the cohort. The most common hospital diagnosis was GI bleed (3/16). The overall admission rate was 87.5% (14/16).
Conclusions: EMS interactions with LVAD patients are infrequent but have high rates of admission and incidence of life-threatening diagnoses. The most common prehospital presenting symptoms were weakness and chest pain, and most prehospital interactions did not require LVAD-specific interventions. In addition to acquiring technical knowledge regarding LVADs, EMS providers should be aware of non-device-related complications including intracranial and GI bleeding and take this into account during their assessment.
... 10 The second report, by Goebel, et al, was a case series of 16 patients with VADs requiring EMS, finding weakness and chest pain to be the most common complaint, with complaints often not VAD-associated. 11 The care of patients with heart failure is complex and requires a coordinated team approach. Heart failure teams in the hospital optimize care of patients at nearly every point, but the prehospital management of these patients remains an opportunity for growth. ...
Background
Patients with ventricular assist devices (VADs) represent a growing population presenting to Emergency Medical Services (EMS), but little is known about their prehospital care. This study aimed to characterize current EMS protocols in the United States for patients with VADs.
Methods
States with state-wide EMS protocols were included. Protocols were obtained from the state EMS website. If not available, the office of the state medical director was contacted. For each state, protocols were analyzed for patient and VAD assessment and treatment variables.
Results
Of 32 states with state-wide EMS protocols, 21 had VAD-specific protocols. With 17 (81%) states noting a pulse may not be palpable, protocols recommended assessing alternate measures of perfusion and mean arterial pressure (MAP; 15 [71%]). Assessment of VAD was advised through listening for pump hum (20 [95%]) and alarms (20 [95%]) and checking the power supply (15 [71%]). For treatment, EMS prehospital consultation was required to begin chest compression in three (14%) states, and mechanical (device) chest compressions were not permitted in two (10%) states. Contact information for VAD coordinator was listed in a minority of five (24%) states. Transport of VAD equipment/backup bag was advised in 18 (86%) states.
Discussion
This national analysis of EMS protocols found VAD-specific EMS protocols are not universally adopted in the United States and are variable when implemented, highlighting a need for VAD teams to partner with EMS agencies to inform standardized protocols that optimize these patients’ care.
... Only 16 patients (5.5%) were transported by EMS. The rest were able to arrive on their own [8,9]. It is difficult to compare these data to Poland. ...
... This pattern is similar to that described previously in the literature, and is likely a manifestation of 24-hour care provided by the LVAD team and coordinators at our center and many others, which can facilitate expedited direct admission to LVAD trained units for suspected device-related complications and malfunctions [3][4][5]. The overall admission rate from the ED in our study is similar to those of prior evaluations, suggesting that the overwhelming majority of LVAD presentations to the ED result in admission [5,6]. ...
Background
Left ventricular assist device (LVAD) patients are vulnerable to over-utilization of resources.
Methods and results
We explored the pattern of emergency department (ED) presentations of LVAD patients and their costs compared with non-LVAD heart failure patients. ED visits between 7/2008 and 7/2017 were reviewed to identify 145 LVAD patients, and 435 patients with known heart failure were selected using propensity score matching for age and sex. ED evaluation metrics, hospitalization cost, and length of stay (LOS) were analyzed. Although the most common ED presentations and their frequency differed between groups, few were LVAD specific. LVAD patients were more likely to have taken personal vehicles or be flown to the ED. They had similar times to triage, rooming, and physician evaluation compared with non-LVAD patients. However, LVAD patients were noted to have a shorter time from physician assessment to disposition (109.8 min vs. 177.0 min, p < 0.001) and, overall, LVAD patients had shorter ED LOS (6.33 vs. 9.82 hrs, p = 0.0001). For patients admitted, no significant difference was found between groups in hospital LOS (6.67 vs 6.58 days, p = 0.928) or total cost (21,524, p = 0.087).
Conclusion
Shorter disposition times without increases in LOS or costs may identify a created healthcare disparity among LVAD patients.
... Worldwide, about one million heart surgeries are performed annually, which require extracorporeal circulation (ECC) using the heart-lung machine [1]. The ECC includes various methods, such as dialysis, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) for respiratory support, extracorporeal life support (ECLS), and ventricular assist devices (VAD) for cardiac support [2][3][4]. During ECC, the contact of blood with foreign surfaces can lead to life-threatening activation of coagulation. ...
During open-heart surgery, the status of hemostasis has to be constantly monitored to quickly and reliably detect bleeding or coagulation disorders. In this study, a novel optimized piezo-based measuring system (PIEZ) for rheological monitoring of hemostasis was established. The applicability of the PIEZ for the evaluation of nucleic acid-based drugs influencing coagulation was analyzed. Thrombin aptamers such as NU172 might be used during extracorporeal circulation (ECC) in combination with a reduced heparin concentration or for patients with heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT). Therefore, the effect of the coagulation inhibiting thrombin aptamer NU172 and the abrogation by its complementary antidote sequence (AD) were investigated by this rheological PIEZ system. After the addition of different NU172 concentrations, the coagulation of fresh human blood was analyzed under static conditions and using an in vitro rotation model under dynamic conditions (simulating ECC). The clotting times (CTs) detected by PIEZ were compared to those obtained with a medical reference device, a ball coagulometer. Additionally, after the circulation of blood samples for 30 min at 37 °C, blood cell numbers, thrombin markers (thrombin-antithrombin III (TAT) and fibrinopeptide A (FPA)) and a platelet activation marker (β-thromboglobulin (β-TG)) were analyzed by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs). The increase of NU172 concentration resulted in prolonged CTs, which were comparable between the reference ball coagulometer and the PIEZ, demonstrating the reliability of the new measuring system. Moreover, by looking at the slope of the linear regression of the viscous and elastic components, PIEZ also could provide information on the kinetics of the coagulation reaction. The shear viscosity at the end of the measurements (after 300 s) was indicative of clot firmness. Furthermore, the PIEZ was able to detect the abrogation of coagulation inhibition after the equimolar addition of NU172 aptamer´s AD. The obtained results showed that the established PIEZ is capable to dynamically measure the hemostasis status in whole blood and can be applied to analyze nucleic acid-based drugs influencing the coagulation.
... In an urban cohort of LVAD recipients who presented to the emergency department by ambulance, more than 87% were admitted to the hospital. 33 The most common chief complaint of these subjects was weakness. Weakness is a subjective complaint that could have a great variety of causes, which may or may not be related to the LVAD. ...
Background:
The number of individuals with advanced heart failure (HF) receiving left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) is growing. Postimplantation LVAD recipients return home to both rural and urban locations. The impact of rural or urban living on postimplantation outcomes has not been adequately explored.
Objective:
This cohort study examined adverse event-free survival, hospitalization-free survival, and all-cause mortality between rural and urban LVAD recipients in the first 2 years after implantation.
Methods:
Data from LVAD recipients (N = 141) implanted at a single center in the northeastern United States were analyzed. Recipients of LVAD were designated as rural or urban by county of residence. Adverse events, hospitalizations, and survival time were examined using multivariate Cox proportional hazards models.
Results:
Thirty-seven percent of LVAD recipients in the cohort were rural. Two-thirds of all LVAD recipients experienced at least 1 adverse event (96/141, 68.1%). Although more urban recipients experienced adverse events, including death, rural versus urban models of both adverse events and survival were nonsignificant (adverse events: log-rank = 1.18, P = .28; hazard ratio [HR], 0.96; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.57-1.63; P = .89; survival: log-rank =2.81, P = .09; HR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.17-1.23; P = .12). Rural LVAD recipients experienced significantly more hospitalizations and shorter hospitalization-free survival (log-rank = 6.67, P = .009). However, the HR for survival was nonsignificant (HR, 1.5; 95% CI, 0.94-2.39; P = .08).
Conclusions:
Frequent adverse events and hospitalizations are of ongoing concern for LVAD recipients. More data are necessary to understand why urban LVAD recipients may experience shorter survival time compared with rural counterparts. Hospitalization may serve as a protective factor for rural LVAD recipients.
Technology continues to expand our ability to manage patients with cardiovascular collapse, either from pump or electrical failure. Patients who are at home with cardiac assist devices may be encountered by prehospital EMS clinicians. Intra-aortic balloon pumps offer hemodynamic support until further definitive cardiac care can be provided. Percutaneous mechanical support devices that are either transaortic or transseptal increase cardiac output while reducing myocardial workload. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation can completely support patients with both cardiac and respiratory failure. Ventricular assist devices have evolved to be longer-term devices. Advances in technology have created a subpopulation of patients living outside the hospital and dependent on cardiovascular-supporting technology. Depending on the specific assist device, the patient may or may not have a palpable pulse or blood pressure. A coordinated exchange of information between the hospital cardiac team and surrounding EMS agencies is key to the safe and effective treatment and transfer of these patients. EMS clinicians should also be able to recognize devices that support cardiac electrical activity and be able to make an assessment about whether a problem relates to a potential device malfunction. Familiarity with the principles of various devices, an organized approach to assessing patients supported by them, and complete exchange of information with subsequent treatment teams are important factors in optimal EMS care.
Advances in left ventricular assist device (LVAD) therapy have resulted in increasing numbers of adult LVAD recipients in the community. However, device failure, stroke, bleeding, LVAD thrombosis and systemic infection can be life-threatening emergencies. Currently, four LVAD systems are implanted in six UK transplant centres, each of which provides device-specific information to local emergency services. This has resulted in inconsistent availability and content of information with the risks of delayed or inappropriate decision-making. In order to improve patient safety, a consortium of UK healthcare professionals with expertise in LVADs developed universally applicable prehospital emergency algorithms. Guidance was framed as closely as possible on the standard ABCDE approach to the assessment of critically ill patients.
Mechanical circulatory support devices have become an important treatment tool for severe acute and chronic heart failure, since heart transplantation cannot meet the demands because of a lack of available donor organs. Since implantation of the first ventricular assist device a constant development of the suitability of these devices has been made. This review will introduce different generations of left ventricular assist devices (LVAD) and elaborate on clinical indications, risk stratification and current literature.
Objectives:
The purpose of this study was to determine the occurrence and causes of readmissions after implantation of axial flow left ventricular assist device (LVAD).
Background:
Based on the REMATCH (Randomized Evaluation of Mechanical Assistance for the Treatment of Congestive Heart Failure) study experience, readmissions after LVAD implantation are thought to be frequent.
Methods:
We retrospectively analyzed admissions to our facility in a cohort of 115 patients implanted between January 2008 and July 2011 with the HeartMate II axial flow LVAD, of whom 42 were bridged to transplant. To account for repeated events, Andersen-Gill models were used to determine possible predictors.
Results:
The patients were followed for 1.4 ± 0.9 years. There were 224 readmissions in 83 patients. The overall readmission rate was 1.64 ± 1.97 per patient-year of follow-up. The readmission rate for the first 6 months was 2.0 ± 2.3 and decreased to 1.2 ± 2.1 during subsequent follow-up. Leading causes were bleeding (66 readmissions in 34 patients), mostly gastrointestinal bleed (51 in 27 patients), cardiac (51 in 36 patients, most for HF or arrhythmia), infections (32 in 25 patients) of which 6 were pump related, and thrombosis (20 in 15 patients) including 13 readmissions due to hemolysis. Preoperative variables associated with (fewer) readmissions in a multivariate model include residence within our hospital-extended referral zone of Minnesota and the neighboring states (hazard ratio: 0.66; 95% confidence interval: 0.48 to 0.91; p = 0.011), hemoglobin (hazard ratio: 0.91, 95% confidence interval: 0.84 to 0.99; p = 0.027) and N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (hazard ratio: 0.98; 95% confidence interval: 0.96 to 1.0 per 1,000-unit increase, p = 0.022). C-statistic for the model: 0.63.
Conclusions:
Readmission rates after axial flow LVAD implantation decrease during the first 6 months and then stabilize. The leading causes are bleeding, cardiac (heart failure and arrhythmia), infections, and thrombosis.
Abstract Left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) are frequently implanted as permanent (bridge to destination [BTD]) or temporary (bridge to transplantation [BTT]) cardiac support. When LVAD patients are discharged to home, they are very likely to require emergency medical services (EMS), but there is very little literature on out-of-hospital emergency care for patients with LVADs. We present two typical cases of LVAD patients for whom EMS was called. In the first case, the patient was in an ambulance two hours distant from our university hospital when a pulsatile system malfunctioned. In the second case, EMS was called to an unconscious LVAD patient. Emergency reference cards, training programs for emergency medical staff, and a 24-hour emergency hotline for the local VAD team are advisable. Key words: left ventricular assist device; emergency medical services; prehospital care.
The Abiomed Impella ® 2.5 is a micro-axial flow, catheter-based left ventricular assist system (LVAS). Designed for percutaneous insertion into the femoral artery and positioned across the aortic valve, the Impella® is capable of pumping 2.5 liters of blood per minute from the patient’s left ventricle into the ascending aorta. Since United States Federal Food and Drug Administration clearance in June of 2008, use of the Impella® 2.5 has grown rapidly.
We operate at the center of a “hub-and-spoke” regional referral network that facilitates the transfer of patients in cardiogenic shock to our facility for definitive care. Based on our recent experience of transporting patients supported on the Impella® 2.5 system, we review system operation, pump position, monitoring, and recommendations for providing safe and efficient transport.
The use of left ventricular assist devices is an accepted therapy for patients with refractory heart failure, but current pulsatile volume-displacement devices have limitations (including large pump size and limited long-term mechanical durability) that have reduced widespread adoption of this technology. Continuous-flow pumps are newer types of left ventricular assist devices developed to overcome some of these limitations.
In a prospective, multicenter study without a concurrent control group, 133 patients with end-stage heart failure who were on a waiting list for heart transplantation underwent implantation of a continuous-flow pump. The principal outcomes were the proportions of patients who, at 180 days, had undergone transplantation, had cardiac recovery, or had ongoing mechanical support while remaining eligible for transplantation. We also assessed functional status and quality of life.
The principal outcomes occurred in 100 patients (75%). The median duration of support was 126 days (range, 1 to 600). The survival rate during support was 75% at 6 months and 68% at 12 months. At 3 months, therapy was associated with significant improvement in functional status (according to the New York Heart Association class and results of a 6-minute walk test) and in quality of life (according to the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure and Kansas City Cardiomyopathy questionnaires). Major adverse events included postoperative bleeding, stroke, right heart failure, and percutaneous lead infection. Pump thrombosis occurred in two patients.
A continuous-flow left ventricular assist device can provide effective hemodynamic support for a period of at least 6 months in patients awaiting heart transplantation, with improved functional status and quality of life. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00121472 [ClinicalTrials.gov].).
Continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) are increasingly implanted to support patients with end-stage heart failure. These patients are at high risk for complications, many of which necessitate emergency care. While rehospitalization rates have been described, there is little data regarding emergency department (ED) visits. We hypothesize that ED visits are frequent and often require admission after LVAD implantation. We performed a retrospective review of patients in our health-care system followed by the advanced heart failure service for LVAD management after implantation between January 2011 and July 2015. We accounted for all ED visits in our system through February 2016, 7 months after the last implantation included. Clinically relevant demographic variables and ED visit details were recorded and analyzed to describe this population. We identified 81 patients with complete data, among whom there were 283 visits (3.49 visits/patient), occurring at a rate of approximately 7.3 ED visits per patient per year alive with LVAD. The most common reason for an ED visit is a complication related to bleeding (18% of visits), followed by chest pain (14%) and dizziness or syncope (13%). Thirty-six percent of patients were discharged from the ED without hospital admission. A growing populace with implanted LVADs represents an important population within emergency medicine. They are at risk for significant complications and frequently present to the ED. While many of these visits may be managed without hospital admission, this specialized patient group represents a potential area for improvement in provider education.
Continuous flow left ventricular assist device (CF-LVAD) therapy has improved the survival of patients with advanced heart failure. However, the readmission rate of CF-LVAD patients is still relatively high. A total of 90 patients who received CF-LVADs between April 2011 and March 2016 at our institute and were discharged home were analyzed retrospectively. They were followed up through March 2017. Clinical data, including frequency, length and etiology of readmission, were obtained from medical records. The mean observation period after initial discharge was 713 ± 322 days. In total, 73 patients (81%) had 236 readmissions, 214 unplanned and 22 planned. The overall and unplanned readmission rates were 1.34 and 1.22 per patient-year, respectively. The rate of freedom from unplanned first readmission at 1 year after initial discharge was 39%. The median interval between the previous hospital discharge and first and second readmissions was 311 and 213 days, respectively (log-rank test, p = 0.117). The rate of readmission after more than three readmissions was significantly higher than that of first or second readmission (log-rank test, p < 0.001). The most common etiology of readmission was driveline infection (DLI) (36%), followed by stroke (9%). The median length of hospital stay due to DLI was 23 days. The patients with repeated unplanned readmissions had significantly lower EuroQol 5 dimensions questionnaire utility score than those with no or just one readmission. Readmission was common in CF-LVAD patients, and the most common etiology of readmissions was DLI. The interval to the next readmission seemed shorter for patients with repeated readmissions.
The number of ventricular assist devices (VADs) being implanted for terminal heart failure is rising at an exponential rate. These implanted patients have a decreased mortality, but still have significant morbidities, as the prevalence of these patients increases in the community. When VAD patients are discharged to home, they will very likely require emergency medical services (EMSs) and emergency medical doctors (EDs) with their future care. The interface of these patients with the community would suggest an increasing prevalence of encounters requiring the need for acute medical care. This will place the initial responsibility of these patients in the hands of EMS first responders and emergency room providers. To date, there is very little literature published on out-of-hospital or ED care for VAD patients. Most EMS personnel and ED feel uncomfortable treating a patient with a VAD because they have not had sufficient exposure. The cardiovascular treatment of VAD patients in the field can pose different challenges typically encountered including difficulties measuring a pulse and sometimes undetectable BP. Despite these unique challenges, official guidelines or even standard operating procedures regarding the emergency treatment of VAD patients are still lacking. We present a basic overview of the most commonly used left VAD systems and propose guidelines that should be followed in the event of an emergency with a VAD patient out of hospital.
Ventricular assist devices (VADs) for the mechanical support of cardiac failure are being used more frequently in children of increasingly younger age. These children have significant and multiple medical comorbidities, and their length of hospital stay has been increasing. As this population of hospitalized VAD-supported children increases, so does the possibility of their need for interfacility transport for specialized diagnostic or therapeutic procedures. Reports on such transports are limited to 3 children who underwent scheduled elective transfers. We report our experience with a child with a Berlin Heart EXCOR left ventricular assist device (Berlin Heart, Berlin, Germany) who required emergent interfacility transport between our hospital and an affiliated institution.
Objective:
The objective of this study is to review and analyze readmission data for patients who received a continuous flow left ventricular assist device (LVAD).
Methods:
A retrospective review of 88 patients implanted with a continuous-flow LVAD between June 2006 and June 2014 was performed. Reason for readmission, frequency, length of stay, and procedures performed during each readmission were recorded. All patients were followed in our LVAD clinic and all readmissions were reported to our program.
Results:
Sixty-seven patients (76%) were discharged following their hospitalization for LVAD implant. In these patients, indication for LVAD support consisted of bridge to transplant (78%) and destination therapy (22%). Total device support time was 30,482 days, with an average support time of 455 ± 376 days. Forty-two patients (63%) were readmitted at least once, with an average length of readmission stay of nine days (median = 6). There were 129 readmissions totaling 1264 hospital days. The main reason for readmission was infection (17%). Despite this relatively high readmission rate, patients spent 86% of their time outside the hospital.
Conclusion:
Although common, LVAD readmissions can be appropriately managed with patients spending the majority of their support time at home.
Left ventricular assist device (LVAD) therapy improves survival, hemodynamic status, and end-organ perfusion in patients with refractory advanced heart failure. Hospital readmission is an important measure of the intensity of LVAD support care.
We analyzed readmissions of 148 patients (mean age, 53.6 ± 12.7 yr; 83% male) who received a HeartMate II LVAD from April 2008 through June 2012. The patients had severe heart failure; 60.1% were in Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support class 1 or 2. All patients were observed for at least 12 months, and readmissions were classified as planned or unplanned. Descriptive and multivariate regression analyses were used to identify predictors of unplanned readmission.
Twenty-seven patients (18.2%) had no readmissions or 69 planned readmissions, and 121 patients (81.8%) had 460 unplanned readmissions. The LVAD-related readmissions were for bleeding, thrombosis, and anticoagulation (n=103; 49.1%), pump-related infections (n=60; 28.6%), and neurologic events (n=28; 13.3%). The readmission rate was 2.1 per patient-year. Unplanned readmissions were for comorbidities and underlying cardiac disease (54.3%) or LVAD-related causes (45.7%). In the unplanned-readmission rate, there was no significant difference between bridge-to-transplantation and destination-therapy patients. Unplanned readmissions were associated with diabetes mellitus (odds ratio [OR]=3.3; P=0.04) and with shorter mileage from residence to hospital (OR=0.998; P=0.046).
Unplanned admissions for LVAD-related sequelae and ongoing comorbidities were common. Diabetes mellitus and shorter distance from residence to hospital were significant predictors of readmission. We project that improved management of comorbidities and of anticoagulation therapy will reduce unplanned readmissions of LVAD patients in the future.
We investigated the incidence and causes of unplanned hospital readmissions after continuous-flow (CF) left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation. We also analyzed the impact of unplanned readmissions on post-CF-LVAD survival and the costs associated with each cause of readmission.
We retrospectively reviewed 126 patients who underwent implantation with a CF-LVAD from January 2007 to December 2013. The timing of readmissions, hospital length of stay, and total length of device support were evaluated. Patients were followed up while receiving support, until transplantation, or until death. Direct hospital costs associated with each readmission were analyzed.
In all, 103 patients underwent implantation for bridge to transplantation and 19 patients for destination therapy; 68 patients were readmitted 156 times (2.2 times/patient) as of the end of follow-up. The median follow-up period was 11 months. While receiving device support, patients spent 93% of their time out of the hospital. The causes of readmission included gastrointestinal bleeding (19%), driveline infection (13%), and stroke (8%). The median time to first readmission was 35 days. Thirty (44%) patients were readmitted within 30 days after discharge. The median direct hospital cost of a single readmission was $7,546. Device malfunction and arrhythmias were the most costly causes of readmission. There was no significant difference in long-term survival between readmitted patients and those who were not readmitted.
Gastrointestinal bleeding and CF-LVAD-related infections were the leading causes of readmission. Patients with a CF-LVAD spent 93% of their time out of hospital after implantation, and readmissions did not have a negative impact on long-term survival. New approaches to minimize these adverse events will continue to improve the efficacy and decrease the cost of CF-LVAD therapy.
Copyright © 2015 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Ventricular assist devices (VADs) are increasingly being used in pediatric patients to support cardiac failure. As more centers adopt this technology, there may be a need to transport these patients over long distances to facilitate patient care and organ transplantation. Food and Drug Administration indications for use state only that the patient must be a candidate for transplantation and does not place restrictions on the transplant capabilities of the implanting medical center. Nontransplanting institutions are able to use this technology with a predetermined agreement to transfer the patient to a partnering transplant center. We report the first two cases of interhospital air and ground transport of nonambulatory or intubated pediatric (<13 kg) patients supported by Berlin Heart EXCOR pediatric VADs and Ikus stationary drivers. We present our protocol for transporting this delicate patient population. In addition, we discuss important challenges encountered on these operations regarding vehicle transfers and the management of vehicle power supply. These two cases demonstrate that the transportation of pediatric patients on Berlin Heart VADs is feasible and safe and should be considered a treatment option in certain situations.
Ventricular assist device (VAD) technology has rapidly evolved, and VADs are now seen as a reliable lifesaving option to support the failing heart in the short- and long-term: in some cases, VAD therapy represents a well-accepted treatment option for advanced heart failure that can obviate the need for heart transplantation. In the near future, more and more cardiologists will encounter VAD patients in their clinical practice and need to know how to handle the inherent risks associated with VAD use. The emergency care of a VAD patient differs from that of conventional practice and specific expertise is required to avoid inappropriate management that could lead to inefficient treatment and/or dangerous consequences. Here, we describe two emergency scenarios in VAD patients, two paradigmatic clinical in-hospital situations, in different settings. Following a brief overview of the role of cardiopulmonary resuscitation maneuvers in VAD patients, we propose a working algorithm that might help to ensure a timely and efficient response to acute demands in this setting.
Background:
Scarce literature exists describing the patterns of readmission after continuous flow left ventricular assist device (CF-LVAD) implantation. These carry significant cost and quality of life implications. We sought to describe the etiology and pattern of readmission among patients receiving CF-LVADs.
Methods:
Frequency, reason, urgency, and duration of readmission as well as freedom from readmission were examined in a retrospective review of our institutional experience. As an indirect means of quality of life, the ratio of days out of hospital (OOH)/days alive with device was calculated.
Results:
From 2006 to 2011, 71 adult patients implanted with a CF device were included. Indication for device implantation was bridge to transplant (n=19), potential bridge to transplant (n=25), or destination therapy (n=27). Length of support averaged 359 days. Total support time was 69.7 patient years. One hundred fifty-five readmissions accounted for a total of 1,659 hospital days. Fifty-six patients were readmitted during the study period. Median time to first readmission was 48 days (range 2 to 663 days). Median length of stay was 5 days. The single most common etiology for readmission was gastrointestinal bleeding accounting for 14% of readmissions. Readmissions were urgent (87%), elective (10%), or life-threatening (3%). Patients on the average enjoyed 92% of their time OOH.
Conclusions:
Patients undergoing CF-LVAD support are often readmitted within 6 months of discharge. Readmissions tend to be of short duration and the most common reason is for gastrointestinal bleeding. Importantly, following discharge after implant procedure, 51 patients spent at least 90% of days OOH.
Abstract Advances in the management of heart failure have led to an increasing number of patients living outside the hospital with a variety of ventricular-assist devices (VADs). These implantable pumps may be placed temporarily as a bridge to cardiac transplantation or resolution of a reversible condition, or as destination therapy for the rest of the patient's life. Emergency medical services (EMS) providers may be called to care for such patients experiencing an emergency related to the device itself, the underlying cardiac condition, or a totally unrelated medical or traumatic issue. Providers should have a basic knowledge of how these devices work and what sort of complications VAD patients may experience. In addition, they should know how to troubleshoot the devices if they alarm or malfunction, what emergency interventions can and cannot be performed, and where to turn for guidance if needed. Challenges related to management of patients with VADs include their poor baseline medical status, limitations of traditional prehospital assessment techniques, the relative infrequency with which these patients are encountered, and the rapidity with which device technology is evolving. This article presents a brief history of VADs, with an emphasis on left ventricular-assist devices (LVADs), reviews the relevant anatomy and pathophysiology, and describes the types of devices currently in clinical use. It discusses patient-specific and device-specific complications that may be encountered and concludes with an approach to prehospital patient assessment and care.
Contemporary ventricular assist device therapy results in a high rate of successful heart transplantation but is associated with bleeding, infections, and other complications. Further reductions in pump size, centrifugal design, and intrapericardial positioning may reduce complications and improve outcomes.
We studied a small, intrapericardially positioned, continuous-flow centrifugal pump in patients requiring an implanted ventricular assist device as a bridge to heart transplantation. The course of investigational pump recipients was compared with that of patients implanted contemporaneously with commercially available devices. The primary outcome, success, was defined as survival on the originally implanted device, transplantation, or explantation for ventricular recovery at 180 days and was evaluated for both noninferiority and superiority. Secondary outcomes included a comparison of survival between groups and functional and quality-of-life outcomes and adverse events in the investigational device group. A total of 140 patients received the investigational pump, and 499 patients received a commercially available pump implanted contemporaneously. Success occurred in 90.7% of investigational pump patients and 90.1% of controls, establishing the noninferiority of the investigational pump (P<0.001; 15% noninferiority margin). At 6 months, median 6-minute walk distance improved by 128.5 m, and both disease-specific and global quality-of-life scores improved significantly.
A small, intrapericardially positioned, continuous-flow, centrifugal pump was noninferior to contemporaneously implanted, commercially available ventricular assist devices. Functional capacity and quality of life improved markedly, and the adverse event profile was favorable.
URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00751972.
Mclean N, Copeland R, Casey N, Samoukovic G, Quigley R. Successful trans-Atlantic air ambulance transfer of a patient supported by a bi-ventricular assist device. Aviat Space Environ Med 2011; 82:825?8.
The ventricular assist device (VAD) is a hemodynamic support device that augments cardiac output for patients with severe ventricular dysfunction. With improved reliability and technological advances, the use of VADs to support patients is increasing. Many VAD-dependent patients ultimately require heart transplants that are only available in specialized centers, necessitating an interhospital transfer. To date there are few reports of long-distance fixed wing aeromedical transport of patients dependent on a VAD. Here we describe the successful transfer of a patient supported by a biventricular assist device (BiVAD) from Cambridge, UK, to Durham, NC, via fixed-wing jet aircraft. During this transfer, we observed hemodynamic alterations secondary to gravitational forces, which should be anticipated and may be mitigated with simple maneuvers. With high-level logistical planning and appropriate medical oversight, patients dependant on BiVADs can be safely transported by fixed wing aircraft over long distances.
