Objectives: Implanting a durable left ventricular assist device (LVAD) in a patient on extracorporeal life support (ECLS) is challenging. The goal of this study was to compare the results of patients from a European registry who had a durable LVAD implanted with or without transition from ECLS to cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). Methods: A total of 531 patients on ECLS support who had an LVAD implant between January 2010 and August 2018 were analysed; after 1:1 propensity score matching, we identified and compared 175 patients in each group. Results: The duration of preoperative ECLS was 7 [standard deviation (SD) 6] vs 7 (SD 6) days in patients with or without CPB (P = 0.984). The surgical time was longer in the CPB group [285 (SD 72) vs 209 [SD 75] min; P ≤ 0.001). The postoperative chest tube output was comparable [1513 (SD 1311) vs 1390 (SD 1121) ml; P = 0.3]. However, re-exploration for bleeding was necessary in 41% vs 29% of patients with or without CPB (P = 0.01) and a significantly higher number of packed red blood cells and fresh frozen plasma [8 (SD 8) vs 6 (SD 4) units; P = 0.001 and 6 (SD 7) vs 5 (SD 5) units; P = 0.03] were administered to patients operated on with CPB. A postoperative mechanical right ventricular support device was necessary in 50% vs 41% of patients (P = 0.08). The stroke rate was not significantly different (P 0.99). No difference in survival was observed. Conclusions: Omitting CPB for an LVAD implant in patients on ECLS is safe and results in shorter operating time, less re-exploration for bleeding and fewer blood products. However, no survival benefit is observed.

Left ventricular assist device implants in patients on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: do we need cardiopulmonary bypass?

Loforte A
;
2022-01-01

Abstract

Objectives: Implanting a durable left ventricular assist device (LVAD) in a patient on extracorporeal life support (ECLS) is challenging. The goal of this study was to compare the results of patients from a European registry who had a durable LVAD implanted with or without transition from ECLS to cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). Methods: A total of 531 patients on ECLS support who had an LVAD implant between January 2010 and August 2018 were analysed; after 1:1 propensity score matching, we identified and compared 175 patients in each group. Results: The duration of preoperative ECLS was 7 [standard deviation (SD) 6] vs 7 (SD 6) days in patients with or without CPB (P = 0.984). The surgical time was longer in the CPB group [285 (SD 72) vs 209 [SD 75] min; P ≤ 0.001). The postoperative chest tube output was comparable [1513 (SD 1311) vs 1390 (SD 1121) ml; P = 0.3]. However, re-exploration for bleeding was necessary in 41% vs 29% of patients with or without CPB (P = 0.01) and a significantly higher number of packed red blood cells and fresh frozen plasma [8 (SD 8) vs 6 (SD 4) units; P = 0.001 and 6 (SD 7) vs 5 (SD 5) units; P = 0.03] were administered to patients operated on with CPB. A postoperative mechanical right ventricular support device was necessary in 50% vs 41% of patients (P = 0.08). The stroke rate was not significantly different (P 0.99). No difference in survival was observed. Conclusions: Omitting CPB for an LVAD implant in patients on ECLS is safe and results in shorter operating time, less re-exploration for bleeding and fewer blood products. However, no survival benefit is observed.
2022
34
4
676
682
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34788423/
https://academic.oup.com/icvts/article/34/4/676/6425638?login=true
Pappalardo F; Potapov E; Loforte A; Morshuis M; Schibilsky D; Zimpfer D; Riebandt J; Etz C; Attisani M; Rinaldi M; Haneya A; Ramjankhan F; Donker D; J...espandi
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
LVAD on ECMO.pdf

Accesso aperto

Descrizione: LVAD on ECMO
Tipo di file: PDF EDITORIALE
Dimensione 847.25 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
847.25 kB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/2318/1897974
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 1
  • Scopus 3
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 3
social impact