Minimally Invasive Direct Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting: Sixteen Years of Single-Center Experience.

Background: Coronary artery disease is a major cause of death globally. Minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB), using a small left anterior thoracotomy, aims to provide a less invasive alternative to traditional procedures, potentially improving patient outcomes with reduced recovery times. Methods: This retrospective, non-randomized study analyzed 310 patients who underwent MIDCAB between July 1999 and April 2022. Data were collected on demographics, clinical characteristics, operative and postoperative outcomes, and follow-up mortality and morbidity. Statistical analysis was conducted using IBM SPSS, with survival curves generated via the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: The cohort had a mean age of 63.3 ± 10.9 years, with 30.6% females. The majority of surgeries were elective (76.1%), with an average operating time of 129.7 ± 35.3 min. The median rate of intraoperative blood transfusions was 0.0 (CI 0.0-2.0) Units. The mean in-hospital stay was 8.7 ± 5.5 days, and the median ICU stay was just one day. Early postoperative complications were minimal, with a 0.64% in-hospital mortality rate. The 6-month and 1-year mortalities were 0.97%, with a 10-year survival rate of 94.3%. There were two cases of perioperative myocardial infarction and no instances of stroke or new onset dialysis. Conclusions: The MIDCAB approach demonstrates significant benefits in terms of patient recovery and long-term outcomes, offering a viable and effective alternative for patients suitable for less invasive procedures. Our results suggest that MIDCAB is a safe option with favorable survival rates, justifying its consideration in high-volume centers focused on minimally invasive techniques.

Surgical Therapy of Infective Prosthesis Endocarditis following TAVI: A Single Center's Experience.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Infective prosthesis endocarditis (IE) following transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) presents significant management challenges, marked by high mortality rates. This study reviews our center's experience with surgical interventions for IE in patients post-TAVI, focusing on outcomes, challenges, and procedural complexities, and providing an overview of the limited literature surrounding this subject. METHODS: This study was executed as a comprehensive retrospective analysis, targeting the clinical outcomes of surgical treatment in patients presenting with PVE following TAVI procedures at our institution. From July 2017 to July 2022, we identified five patients who had previously undergone transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation and were later diagnosed with PVE needing surgery, strictly adhering to the modified Duke criteria. RESULTS: All surgical procedures were reported successful with no intra- or postoperative mortality. Patients were predominantly male (80%), with an average age of 76 ± 8.6 years, presenting mostly with dyspnea (NYHA Class II). The mean follow-up was between 121 and 1973 days, with outcomes showing no occurrences of stroke, myocardial infarction, or major bleeding. One patient expired from unrelated causes 3.7 years post-surgery. The operative and postoperative protocols demonstrated effective disease management with enhanced survival and minimal complications. CONCLUSIONS: The surgical treatment of IE following TAVI, though challenging, can be successfully achieved with careful patient selection and a multidisciplinary approach. The favorable outcomes suggest that surgical intervention remains a viable option for managing this high-risk patient group. Our study also highlights the scarce literature available on this topic, suggesting an urgent need for more comprehensive research to enhance understanding and improve treatment strategies. Future studies with larger cohorts are needed to further validate these findings and refine surgical strategies for this growing patient population.

Hemodynamical Evaluation of a New Surgically Implanted Pulsatile Right Ventricular Assist Device Driven by a Conventional Intra-Aortic Balloon Pump Console.

Severe right heart failure, often overlooked and challenging to manage, has prompted a growing interest in innovative approaches to provide functional support. This study uses experimentation in large porcine models to introduce a novel prototype of a pulsatile mechanical circulatory support device and document its effects when deployed as a right ventricular assist device (RVAD). The pulsatile ventricular assist platform (pVAP), featuring a membrane pump driven by an intra-aortic balloon pump console, actively generates pulsatile flow to propel right ventricular blood into the pulmonary artery. This novel prototype demonstrates promising potential in addressing the challenges of right heart failure management. After preliminary in vitro assessments, the pVAP was tested on seven porcine models in a healthy state and after the induction of right ventricular failure. During the procedure, a set of standard (ie, standard-of-care) hemodynamic measurements was obtained. Additionally, invasive pressure-volume loop analysis was employed to examine left ventricular hemodynamics. Results indicated that activation of the pVAP during right ventricular failure significantly improved systemic hemodynamics and enhanced left ventricular function. This study sheds light on the potential of the pVAP in managing right heart failure.

Outcomes of modular cable exchange in HeartMate 3 patients versus conventional driveline repair in HeartMate II patients.

BACKGROUND: Driveline (DL) damages are a common difficulty among ventricular assist devices (VAD). Repairing the electrical fibers inside the DL on a running pump is hazardous and requires technical expertise, which is not easily available on site. A new feature of the HeartMate3 (Abbott, U.S.A.) LVAD is a modular driveline that allows an easy exchange of the DL cord. In this report we analyze our experiences with this feature. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of 302 patients who underwent either HeartMate II or HeartMate 3 implantation between February 2004 and September 2021. Patients were screened for driveline faults and need for exchange or repair of driveline or VAD exchange. Documented were baseline characteristics, reasons for DL or VAD exchange, and complications. Follow-up was three months after the procedure. RESULTS: We present a cohort of 302 patients who underwent either HMII (n = 107;35.4%) or HM 3 (n = 195; 64.5%) implantation. Out of those, 40 patients (40/302; 13.2%) required driveline repair (DLRe) or exchange (DLEx). Out of 107 HMII patients, 9 showed severe DL damages (9/107; 8.4%). Six patients (6/9; 66.6%) underwent DLRe, two patients (2/6; 33.3%) required VAD exchange after DLRe, one patient (1/2;50%) experienced emergency VAD exchange after pump stop. The DLRe procedure in the other four patients (4/6; 66.6%) was successful. Due to damage to the internal driveline two patients (2/9; 22.2%) underwent emergency device exchange and one patient (1/9;11.1%) was listed for transplantation. 31 out 195 HM3 patients underwent exchange of the modular DL. In none of the cases, damages of the internal fibers were the reasons for the exchange. In 100% of the cases, damages of the external coating were the reason for DL exchange. In none of the cases, complications occurred after the exchange procedure. CONCLUSIONS: Driveline damages are a habitual, recurrent complication in VAD patients. The exchange of the modular driveline cable of the HM3 is feasible and safe compared to the conventional DL repair in HMII patients. Risky repair attempts and surgical LVAD exchange due to major damages of the electrical fibers can be avoided successfully by the new feature of HM3 driveline.

Is there a sex gap in outcomes of comparable patients supported with left ventricular assist devices?

OBJECTIVES: Historically, females were described as suffering from worse outcomes after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation. However, females' preoperative conditions are unique, making direct comparisons with males challenging. This study aimed to select through propensity score (PS) matching two preoperatively comparable populations of females and males and test if any real sex-related difference exists regarding survival and adverse events after LVAD implantation. METHODS: This retrospective single-center observational study investigated patients who received LVAD implantation between 2010 and 2018. PS matching was applied to balance preoperative heterogeneity between males and females. Primary endpoint was survival at follow-up. Secondary endpoints included perioperative outcomes and LVAD-related adverse events. RESULTS: 92 fully comparable females(n = 46) and males(n = 46) were selected after PS matching (median age:57 years, min-max:18-75). 26.1% of patients required preoperative mechanical circulatory support. Females needed more intraoperative fresh frozen plasma (p < 0.001) and platelets transfusions (p = 0.008) compared to males, but postoperative outcomes were comparable between groups. In-hospital, 1 and 2-year survival were 78.3%, 69.6% and 65.2%, respectively, with no differences between groups. Survival probability remained comparable up to 8 years of follow-up (p = 0.35). Overall, females showed a higher rate of strokes (p = 0.039) compared to males in the follow-up time. CONCLUSIONS: After reducing preoperative heterogeneity between females and males, survival after LVAD implantation does not differ based on sex. However, differences might exist in terms of higher transfusions and strokes in females. Reducing preoperative sex disparities and developing intraoperative and anticoagulation strategies which acknowledge sex-related variations might help abolishing differences in LVAD outcomes.

Three-year follow-up after less-invasive left ventricular assist device exchange to HeartMate 3™.

BACKGROUND: Device exchange to a newer generation left ventricular assist device (LVAD) offers the opportunity to benefit from improved adverse events profiles. We present the three-year results of a patient cohort undergoing VAD upgrades to a new generation device focusing on outcomes and adverse events. METHODS: We present the first series of patients who underwent LVAD upgrade to HeartMate 3™ (Abbott Laboratories; Abbott Park, IL, USA). All operations were performed less invasively. Follow-up time was three years after LVAD exchange. RESULTS: Overall four HeartMate II™ (Abbott Laboratories; Abbott Park, IL, USA) and two HVAD patients underwent LVAD upgrade. In five cases severe infection of the VAD led to device exchange (83%, 5/6). Three-year survival after LVAD exchange was 100% (6/6). In the follow-up examinations one patient showed a single syncope and several low flow alarms (1/6). The remaining five patients showed no technical malfunctions of the LVAD or hemodynamic adverse events (5/6). Four out of five patients whose devices had to be changed due to an infection suffered a local re-infection (4/5), which did not require any further surgical intervention. Four patients were successfully transplanted, and two patients were still on device support at three years after LVAD exchange. CONCLUSIONS: Three-year outcomes and adverse events after LVAD exchange to HeartMate 3™ (Abbott Laboratories). show excellent results. The superior hemocompatibility in terms of pump thrombosis makes the HM3 a favored choice in case of LVAD exchange due previous pump thrombosis. However, in cases of exchange due to device infection the risk of re-infection remains high.

Left ventricular assist device implantation in patients with left ventricular thrombus.

An intra-cavitary left ventricular (LV) thrombus is a relative contraindication to LV assist device (LVAD) implantation based on increased thromboembolic risks. Herein, we present our experience with LVAD patients with or without preoperative diagnosis of LV-thrombus. We retrospectively investigated 563 patients who received LVAD implantation between 2004 and 2018. Diagnosis of LV-thrombus was verified with computed tomography scan, magnetic resonance imaging, echocardiography, or intraoperative LV inspection. The primary endpoint was 30-day survival free of stroke and pump thrombosis. Overall, 72 patients (12.8%) had a diagnosis of LV-thrombus. They were younger (51 years; IQR:41-59), affected by severely reduced ejection fraction (15%; IQR:10-20), more often presenting with dilated cardiomyopathy (61.8%) and INTERMACS profile 1 (33.3%). Preoperative atrial fibrillation was frequent in patients without LV-thrombus (38.9%). Conventional sternotomy was the preferred approach in LV-thrombus patients (77.8%), based on more HMII implantations in these patients (41.7%). Survival free of strokes and pump thrombosis at 30 days was comparable (P = .5751) between patients with (83.3%) or without LV-thrombus (80.9%). LVAD implantation in patients with preoperative LV-thrombus is safe and feasible. When managed through correct diagnostic and intraoperative strategies including accurate inspection of the LV cavity, these patients show similar 30-day outcomes compared to patients without LV-thrombus.

Flying after left ventricular assist device implantation.

Literature on the air travel activities of patients supported by permanent mechanical assist devices is rare. To the best of our knowledge, no air travel guidelines or fitness prerequisites exist on whether and when ventricular assist device (VAD) patients are allowed to travel by plane after device implantation. In this study, we evaluated the topic of air travel after VAD implantation. This working group aimed to produce a report on air travel passengers supported by VADs, regarding their fitness to fly. Fifty left ventricular assist device (LVAD) patients were surveyed in a worldwide multicenter study. The single survey was performed with a multimethod design, including interviews conducted face-to-face, online, and on phone. Out of 50 patients, 97% described their traveling by aircraft as perfect and uneventful during the flight. Eighty-five percent of the study participants consulted their medical practitioner before the flight. No patient reported the occurrence of a severe condition associated with flying. LVAD alarms, especially low flow alarms, did not occur in any of the devices. Thirty-five percent of the surveyed patients, however, stated a major problem pertaining to the security check procedures at the airport. The results of this study suggest that commercial air travel is safe for stable patients on permanent VAD support and traveling can be resumed securely after VAD implantation. Conscientious preparation by packing necessary devices, fluids, medications, and careful preparation for the airport security check is recommended.

Minimally invasive left ventricular assist device implantation: optimizing device design for this approach.

Introduction: The global heart failure (HF) burden is expected to increase due to aging populations, increasing number of end-stage HF patients and adverse lifestyle changes. Mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices such as left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) have become a promising treatment option for short-term and long-term circulatory support of end-stage HF patients.Areas covered: Recent developments in MCS technology have been focused on miniaturization leading to the development of minimally invasive surgical procedures for LVAD implantation. This helps overcome possible postoperative complications such as major incisions and poor outcomes due to infections, right heart failure, and bleeding. This article discusses clinical and technological developments in the field of minimally invasive procedures for LVAD implantation.Expert opinion: Most patients might benefit from minimally invasive LVAD implantation performed through a limited left lateral thoracotomy associated with an upper hemisternotomy or a right anterior thoracotomy. The thoracotomy approach can also be considered in case of pump exchange or pump explant. The success of these techniques is mainly based on the optimization of LVAD pump design, inflow cannula insertion, and outflow graft as well as driveline exit sites. The future direction of the LVAD field is likely to include less-invasive approaches and smartificial technologies.

Device profile of the heartware HVAD system as a bridge-to-transplantation in patients with advanced heart failure: overview of its safety and efficacy.

Introduction: Heart failure (HF) is one of the rising problems in the contemporary society with growing incidences of end-stage HF. While heart transplantation (HT) is the gold standard treatment for end-stage HF, its availability is limited by the lack of heart donors. As a consequence, left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) are becoming key therapies as bridge to transplant (BTT) strategy to improve survival and outcomes.Areas covered: A significant advancement for wider applications of LVADs as BTT was facilitated by the introduction of miniaturized pumps such as the HVAD (HeartWare®, Medtronic, MN, USA), allowing intrapericardial implants and less-invasive approaches. In this review article, we describe the technical features of the HVAD and its outcomes in terms of efficacy and safety when implanted as BTT strategy. Moreover, we discuss the postoperative results of HT in HVAD recipients and its application in the pediatric population.Expert opinion: It has been demonstrated that the HVAD positively influences the survival of end-stage HF patients awaiting HT, with an acceptable rate of adverse events. Due to its reduced size, it is particularly suitable for LVAD implantations through lateral thoracotomy and in patients with small thoracic dimensions.