Left ventricular device as destination therapy: Are we there yet?

Current Opinion in Cardiology

Volumn 24, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 184-189

  Badiwala, Mitesh V ^a   Rao, Vivek ^a  

^a TORONTO GENERAL HOSPITAL   (Canada)

Author keywords

Adverse events; Destination therapy; Heart failure; Left ventricular assist device; Outcomes

Indexed keywords

INOTROPIC AGENT;

CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; HEART ASSIST DEVICE; HEART FAILURE; HEART LEFT VENTRICLE ASSIST DEVICE; HEART TRANSPLANTATION; HIGH RISK PATIENT; HUMAN; MORBIDITY; MORTALITY; MULTIPLE ORGAN FAILURE; POSTOPERATIVE THROMBOSIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTHESIS FAILURE; REVIEW; SEPSIS; SURVIVAL RATE; SURVIVAL TIME; THROMBOEMBOLISM;

HEART FAILURE; HEART-ASSIST DEVICES; HUMANS; PROSTHESIS IMPLANTATION; PULSATILE FLOW; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC;

EID: 62249114891     PISSN: 02684705     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/HCO.0b013e328323f58f     Document Type: Review

References (24)

1. Rosamond W, Flegal K, Furie K, et al. Heart disease and stroke statistics - 2008 update: a report from the American Heart Association Statistics Committee and Stroke Statistics Subcommittee. Circulation 2008; 117:e25-e146.
2. Rose EA, Gelijns AC, Moskowitz AJ, et al., Randomized Evaluation of Mechanical Assistance for the Treatment of Congestive Heart Failure (REMATCH) Study Group. Long-term mechanical left ventricular assistance for end-stage heart failure. N Engl J Med 2001; 345:1435-1443.
3. Stevenson LW, Miller LW, Desvigne-Nickens P, et al. Left ventricular assist device as destination for patients undergoing intravenous inotropic therapy: a subset analysis from REMATCH (Randomized Evaluation of Mechanical Assistance in Treatment of Chronic Heart Failure). Circulation 2004; 110:975-981.
4. Park SJ, Tector A, Piccioni W, et al. Left ventricular assist devices as destination therapy: a new look at survival. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2005; 129:9-17.
5. Long JW, Kfoury AG, Slaughter MS, et al. Long-term destination therapy with the HeartMate XVE left ventricular assist device: improved outcomes since the REMATCH study. Congest Heart Fail 2005; 11:133-138.
6. Long JW, Healy AH, Rasmusson BY, et al. Improving outcomes with long-term 'destination' therapy using left ventricular assist devices. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2008; 135:1353-1360; discussion 1360-1361. This paper details the largest single-center experience using the HeartMate XVE device in destination therapy. The outcomes reported are the best reported outcomes in this patient population to date.
7. Lietz K, Long JW, Kfoury AG, et al. Outcomes of left ventricular assist device implantation as destination therapy in the post-REMATCH era: implications for patient selection. Circulation 2007; 116:497-505. This paper details the multicenter US post-REMATCH experience with the HeartMate XVE device for destination therapy. It also reports a preoperative risk assessment scoring tool that can be used to risk stratify potential destination therapy patients.
8. Rogers JG, Butler J, Lansman SL, et al. Chronic mechanical circulatory support for inotrope-dependent heart failure patients who are not transplant candidates: results of the INTrEPID Trial. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007; 50:741-747. This paper reports the most recent experience with the Novacor LVAD device for destination therapy in inotrope-dependent nontransplant candidates.
9. Frazier OH, Gemmato C, Myers TJ, et al. Initial clinical experience with the HeartMate II axial-flow left ventricular assist device. Tex Heart Inst J 2007; 34:275-281. Provides a recent single-center experience with the HeartMate II device and reports on device durability out to 749 days.
10. Selzman CH, Sheridan BC. Off-pump insertion of continuous flow left ventricular assist devices. J Card Surg 2007; 22:320-322.
11. Sun BC, Firstenberg MS, Louis LB, et al. Placement of long-term implantable ventricular assist devices without the use of cardiopulmonary bypass. J Heart Lung Transplant 2008; 27:718-721.
12. Haj-Yahia S, Birks EJ, Rogers P, et al. Midterm experience with the Jarvik 2000 axial flow left ventricular assist device. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2007; 134:199-203.
13. Strüber M, Sander K, Lahpor J, et al. HeartMate II left ventricular assist device; early European experience. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2008; 34:289-294. This paper provides the outcomes from a large consecutive series of patients receiving HeartMate II LVAD therapy including destination therapy patients.
14. Miller LW, Pagani FD, Russell SD, et al. Use of a continuous-flow device in patients awaiting heart transplantation. N Engl J Med 2007; 357:885-896. This paper demonstrates the efficacy and significantly reduced adverse events profile of the HeartMate II device in a large series of bridge-to-transplant patients.
15. Radovancevic B, Vrtovec B, de Kort E, et al. End-organ function in patients on long-term circulatory support with continuous- or pulsatile-flow assist devices. J Heart Lung Transplant 2007; 26:815-818. This paper describes end-organ function comparing long-term continuous versus pulsatile LVAD flow.
16. Feller ED, Sorensen EN, Haddad M, et al. Clinical outcomes are similar in pulsatile and nonpulsatile left ventricular assist device recipients. Ann Thorac Surg 2007; 83:1082-1088. This paper describes clinical outcomes comparing long-term continuous versus pulsatile LVAD use.
17. Garcia S, Kandar F, Boyle A, et al. Effects of pulsatile- and continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices on left ventricular unloading. J Heart Lung Transplant 2008; 27:261-267. This paper reports the effect of pulsatile versus continuous flow LVAD therapy on left ventricular unloading.
18. Dang NC, Topkara VK, Mercando M, et al. Right heart failure after left ventricular assist device implantation in patients with chronic congestive heart failure. J Heart Lung Transplant 2006; 25:1-6.
19. 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; 86:832-840; discussion 832-840. This paper reports on the incidence of right heart dysfunction following pulsatile versus continuous flow LVAD support.
20. Farrar DJ, Bourque K, Dague CP, et al. Design features, developmental status, and experimental results with the Heartmate III centrifugal left ventricular assist system with a magnetically levitated rotor. ASAIO J 2007; 53:310-315.
21. Pitsis AA, Visouli AN, Vassilikos V, et al. First human implantation of a new rotary blood pump: design of the clinical feasibility study. Hellenic J Cardiol 2006; 47:368-376.
22. Esmore DS, Kaye D, Salamonsen R, et al. Initial clinical experience with the VentrAssist left ventricular assist device: the pilot trial. J Heart Lung Transplant 2008; 27:479-485.
23. Esmore D, Kaye D, Spratt P, et al. A prospective, multicenter trial of the VentrAssist left ventricular assist device for bridge to transplant: safety and efficacy. J Heart Lung Transplant 2008; 27:579-588.
24. Pae WE, Connell JM, Adelowo A, et al. Does total implantability reduce infection with the use of a left ventricular assist device? The LionHeart experience in Europe. J Heart Lung Transplant 2007; 26:219-229.