Perioperative management of left ventricular assist devices.

The use of mechanical circulatory support for patients with severe heart failure is on the rist. The poeoperative, intraoperative and postoperative challenges the anaesthesiologists skills. These are discussed in this review

Intravenous thrombolytic therapy for patients with ventricular assist device thrombosis: An attempt to avoid reoperation.

A growing number of patients are undergoing prolonged management of advanced heart failure with the use of continuous flow left ventricular assist devices (LVADs). Subsequently, an increasing number of patients are presenting with complications associated with these devices. Based on an analysis of three major LVAD institutions, the number of patients developing LVAD pump thrombosis may be much higher than originally projected.[1,2] The management of this highly feared complication continues to be challenging, as the population of LVAD patients is very heterogeneous and heavily burdened with comorbidities. The standard protocol of increasing anticoagulation may fail to achieve successful resolution of thrombus. Difficulty and poor prognosis may make reoperation less than desirable. Here, we present a case of successful thrombolysis following intravenous administration of tissue plasminogen activator in the Intensive Care Unit setting.

Anesthesia for gastrointestinal endoscopy in patients with left ventricular assist devices: Initial experience with 68 procedures.

Aims and Objectives: Continuous flow left ventricular assist devices (LVAD) have emerged as a reliable treatment option for heart failure. Because of bleeding secondary to anticoagulation, these patients present frequently for gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy. The presently available literature on perioperative management of these patients is extremely limited and is primarily based upon theoretical principles. Materials and Methods: Perioperative records of patients with LVAD undergoing (GI) endoscopy between 2008 and 2012 were reviewed. Patient, device and procedure specific information was analyzed. Results: A total of 105 LVADs were implanted, and 68 procedures were performed in 39 patients. The most common indication was GI bleed (48/68), with yearly risk of 8.57% per patient. A total of 63 procedures were performed under deep sedation, with five procedures requiring general anesthesia. Intra‑procedure hypotension was managed by fluids and (or) vasopressors/inotropes (phenylephrine, ephedrine or milrinone) guided by plethysmographic waveform, non‑invasive blood pressure (NIBP) and LVADs pulsatility index (for HeartMate II)/flow pulsatility (for HeartWare). No patient required invasive monitoring and both NIBP and pulse oximeter could be reliably used for monitoring (and guided management) in all patients due to the presence of native heart’s pulsatile output. Conclusion: In the presence of residual heart function, with optimal device settings, non‑invasive hemodynamic monitoring can be reliably used in these patients while undergoing GI endoscopy under general anesthesia or monitored anesthesia care. Transient hypotensive episodes respond well to fluids/vasopressors without the need of increasing device speed that can be detrimental.