How to Improve the Outcomes of LVAD Implantation?

BACKGROUND

Heart transplantation is the treatment of choice for selected patients with end-stage heart failure. Persistent donor organ shortage has resulted in a growing interest in mechanical circulatory support not only as a bridge to transplantation but also as a destination therapy.

METHODS

The aim of the study was to analyze the indications, comorbidities, operative technique, complications, and follow-up of all patients undergoing left ventricular assist device implantation in one of the most experienced clinics in Poland between 2015 and 2020 and state the best timing of the procedure.

RESULTS

This study included 78 individuals (72 males, 92%; 6 females, 8%) with a median age of 57 years (range, 50-62 years). The median body mass index was 27.12 (range, 25.2-29.5). The etiology of cardiomyopathy was ischemic (n = 31, 39%), dilated cardiomyopathy (n = 47, 60%), and others. Sixty-four patients presented with New York Heart Association class IV (82%). Leading heart rhythm was sinus (n = 31, 40%) and pacemaker rhythm (n = 47, 60%). Sixty-four patients had implantable cardioverter defibrillator implantation (82%). Preoperative echocardiography revealed a median left ventricle ejection fraction of 14.5% (range, 10%-15%) and LV dimension 7.55 cm (range, 6.9-8.275 cm). In 51 patients (65%), imaging confirmed pulmonary hypertension. The intensive care unit stay was 6 days (range, 4.25-11.75 days). Median time to extubation was 25 hours (range, 23.75-70 hours). The median time to discharge was 31.5 days (range, 25-31.85 days). In-hospital mortality was 12 patients (15%). Median follow-up time was 19.5 months (range, 11.25-31 months) months, with the longest follow-up of about 53 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Appropriate selection of candidates and timing of left ventricular assist device implantation are critical for improved outcomes of destination therapy.