Are Opioids Contraindicated for the Palliative Care Patient with Hypotension?

Palliative care providers are frequently called to consult on patients with tenuous hemodynamics caused by an underlying serious illness. In this article, we describe a patient with end-stage renal disease who developed hypotension and severe pain due to calciphylaxis. Although opioid medications are used frequently for advanced symptom management, few studies have examined their effects on blood pressure in critically ill patients. A common concern is that opioids can worsen hypotension, and this concern can be a source of distress for providers caring for patients with unstable hemodynamics. We describe challenges encountered when trying to attend to the providers' concerns and guide shared medical decision making with the patient and family. We also summarize the current limited knowledge about the effect of opioids on hemodynamics and highlight a topic in need of further exploration.

Palliative Care for Patients on Mechanical Circulatory Support.

Palliative care (PC) teams are primed to support patients with advanced illness, including patients with mechanical circulatory support (MCS), and are increasingly being called upon to help care for these patients. Detailed guidelines for PC engagement are lacking despite key stakeholders' endorsements of collaboration. PC should encompass the decision-making period, the duration of therapy, and end-of-life care. PC teams can assist with symptom management, advance care planning, and communication across the continuum of MCS care. However, the current state of MCS and PC collaboration is variable and can be hindered by staffing challenges and clinician discomfort. To best care for patients who receive advanced cardiopulmonary life-sustaining therapies, meaningful engagement of PC during all phases of MCS is essential.

Destination Therapy: Standardizing the Role of Palliative Medicine and Delineating the DT-LVAD Journey.

CONTEXT: Destination therapy (DT) patients face significant challenges as they transition from chronic left ventricular assist device (LVAD) support to comfort-oriented care. Integration of palliative medicine (PM) into the multidisciplinary team is important to facilitate advanced care planning (ACP) and improve quality of life (QoL). OBJECTIVES: We evaluated the impact of a structured programmatic approach to the end-of-life (EOL) process in DT patients as measured by QoL surveys and the utilization of ACP. METHODS: We instituted a four prong intervention approach: 1) delineated the path from implant to EOL by defining specific stages, including a transitional phase where care limits were agreed upon, 2) standardized the role of PM, 3) held transitional care meetings to support shared decision-making, and 4) held multidisciplinary team debriefings to facilitate communication. Preintervention and postintervention outcomes were measured for patients/caregivers by using the QUAL-E/QUAL-E (family) QoL instrument. Wilcoxon signed-ranks test compared nonparametric variables. RESULTS: All patients (n = 41)/caregivers (n = 28) reported improved QoL measures (patient P = 0.035/caregiver P = 0.046). Preparedness plans increased from 52% to 73% after implementation and advance directives increased from 71% to 83%. Fifty-nine percent of the patients completed an outpatient PM clinic visit; 51% completed/scheduled a second visit. Clinician outcomes improved including satisfaction with multidisciplinary team communication/expectations, ACP processes, and EOL management. CONCLUSION: A programmatic approach that standardizes the role of PM and delineates the patient's path from implant to EOL improved quality outcomes and increased implementation of ACP. A defined communication process allowed the multidisciplinary team to have a clear patient management approach.

Ambulatory Inotrope Infusions in Advanced Heart Failure: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to systematically review the available evidence of risks and benefits of ambulatory intravenous inotrope therapy in advanced heart failure (HF). BACKGROUND: Ambulatory inotrope infusions are sometimes offered to patients with advanced Stage D HF; however, an understanding of the relative risks and benefits is lacking. METHODS: On August 7, 2016, we searched SCOPUS, Web of Science, Ovid EMBASE, and Ovid MEDLINE for studies of long-term use of intravenous inotropes in outpatients with advanced HF. Meta-analysis was performed using random effects models. RESULTS: A total of 66 studies (13 randomized controlled trials and 53 observational studies) met inclusion criteria. Most studies were small and at high risk for bias. Pooled rates of death (41 studies), all-cause hospitalization (15 studies), central line infection (13 studies), and implantable cardioverter-defibrillator shocks (3 studies) of inotropes were 4.2, 22.2, 3.6, and 2.4 per 100 person-months follow-up, respectively. Improvement in New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class was greater in patients taking inotropes than in controls (mean difference of 0.60 NYHA functional classes; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.22 to 0.98; p = 0.001; 5 trials). There was no significant difference in mortality risk in those taking inotropes compared with controls (pooled risk ratio: 0.68; 95% CI: 0.40 to 1.17; p = 0.16; 9 trials). Data were too limited to pool for other outcomes or to stratify by indication (i.e., bridge-to-transplant or palliative). CONCLUSIONS: High-quality evidence for the risks and benefits of ambulatory inotrope infusions in advanced HF is limited, particularly when used for palliation. Available data suggest that inotrope therapy improves NYHA functional class and does not impact survival.

Palliative Care Clinicians Caring for Patients Before and After Continuous Flow-Left Ventricular Assist Device.

Left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) are an available treatment option for carefully selected patients with advanced heart failure. Initially developed as a bridge to transplantation, LVADs are now also offered to patients ineligible for transplantation as destination therapy (DT). Individuals with a DT-LVAD will live the remainder of their lives with the device in place. Although survival and quality of life improve with LVADs compared with medical therapy, complications persist including bleeding, infection, and stroke. There has been increased emphasis on involving palliative care (PC) specialists in LVAD programs, specifically the DT-LVAD population, from the pre-implantation process through the end of life. Palliative care specialists are well poised to provide education, guidance, and support to patients, families, and clinicians throughout the LVAD journey. This article addresses the complexities of the LVAD population, describes key challenges faced by PC specialists, and discusses opportunities for building collaboration between PC specialists and LVAD teams.

Ethical Analysis of Withdrawing Total Artificial Heart Support.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the characteristics of patients who undergo withdrawal of total artificial heart support and to explore the ethical aspects of withdrawing this life-sustaining treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of all adult recipients of a total artificial heart at Mayo Clinic from the program's inception in 2007 through June 30, 2015. Management of other life-sustaining therapies, approach to end-of-life decision making, engagement of ethics and palliative care consultation, and causes of death were analyzed. RESULTS: Of 47 total artificial heart recipients, 14 patients or their surrogates (30%) requested withdrawal of total artificial heart support. No request was denied by treatment teams. All 14 patients were supported with at least 1 other life-sustaining therapy. Only 1 patient was able to participate in decision making. CONCLUSION: It is widely held to be ethically permissible to withdraw a life-sustaining treatment when the treatment no longer meets the patient's health care-related goals (ie, the burdens outweigh the benefits). These data suggest that some patients, surrogates, physicians, and other care providers believe that this principle extends to the withdrawal of total artificial heart support.

Palliative Medicine and Preparedness Planning for Patients Receiving Left Ventricular Assist Device as Destination Therapy-Challenges to Measuring Impact and Change in Institutional Culture.

CONTEXT: Although left ventricular assist devices as destination therapy (DT-LVAD) can improve survival, quality of life, and functional capacity in well-selected patients with advanced heart failure, there remain unique challenges to providing quality end-of-life care in this population. Palliative care involvement is universally recommended, but how to best operationalize this care and measure success is unknown. OBJECTIVES: To characterize the process of preparedness planning (PP) for patients receiving DT-LVAD at our institution and better understand opportunities for quality improvement or procedural transferability. METHODS: Retrospective review of 107 consecutive patients undergoing DT-LVAD implantation at a single institution between 2009 and 2013. Information regarding demographics, advance care planning, and mortality was abstracted from the medical record and analyzed. Findings were compared with a historical cohort who received DT-LVAD implantation at the same institution before the development of PP (2003-2009). RESULTS: Mean age of patients receiving DT-LVAD was 64.3 years (SD ± 10.7). At last follow-up, 46 patients (43%) had died. Mean post-DT-LVAD survival in this group was 1.1 years (SD ± 1.2). Eighty-nine percent of patient had palliative care consultation before implantation, and 70% completed PP. Although 66% of patients completed an advance directive (AD) preimplantation, only two ADs (2.8%) specifically mentioned DT-LVAD and none addressed core elements of PP. AD completion rates improved from 47% before our policy on PP (P = 0.012). CONCLUSION: A disconnect was evident between the rigor of PP discussions and the content of ADs in the medical record. We urge that future efforts focus on narrowing this gap.

Discordance of Patient-Reported and Clinician-Ordered Resuscitation Status in Patients Hospitalized With Acute Decompensated Heart Failure.

CONTEXT: Accurate documentation of preferences for cardiopulmonary resuscitation at hospital admission is critical to ensure that patients receive resuscitation or not in accordance with their wishes. OBJECTIVES: We sought to identify and characterize inconsistencies in patient-reported and clinician-ordered resuscitation status in patients hospitalized with acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF). METHODS: Southeastern Minnesota residents hospitalized with ADHF were prospectively enrolled into a study that included the administration of face-to-face questionnaires from January 2014 to February 2016. Patient-reported resuscitation status was assessed at enrollment using a validated question. Clinician-ordered resuscitation preferences at hospital admission were abstracted from the electronic medical record. RESULTS: Of the 400 patients administered the questionnaire; 213 (53.3%) stated their resuscitation preference as Full Code, 166 (41.5%) do-not-resuscitate (DNR), and 21 (5.3%) were unsure. In comparison, clinician-ordered resuscitation status was Full Code in 263 (65.8%) patients, DNR in 133 (33.3%), and not documented in four (1.0%). Patient-reported and clinician-ordered resuscitation status was discordant in 20% of patients, of whom 5.6% elected Full Code by questionnaire and had a DNR clinician order, and 14.4% elected DNR by questionnaire but had a Full Code clinician order. Differences in age, comorbidities, health literacy, marital status, completion of advance directives, hospital length of stay, and discharge destination in patients with discordant vs. concordant resuscitation preferences were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Patient-reported and clinician-ordered resuscitation preferences were discordant in 20% of patients hospitalized with ADHF. The underlying etiology of these inconsistencies may reflect factors such as patient indecisiveness or patient-clinician miscommunication and requires further exploration.

Deactivation of Left Ventricular Assist Devices: Differing Perspectives of Cardiology and Hospice/Palliative Medicine Clinicians.

BACKGROUND: Beliefs around deactivation of a left ventricular assist device (LVAD) vary substantially among clinicians, institutions, and patients. Therefore, we sought to understand perspectives regarding LVAD deactivation among cardiology and hospice/palliative medicine (HPM) clinicians. METHODS AND RESULTS: We administered a 41-item survey via electronic mail to members of 3 cardiology and 1 HPM professional societies. A convergent parallel mixed-methods design was used. From October through November 2011, 7168 individuals were sent the survey and 440 responded. Three domains emerged: (1) LVAD as a life-sustaining therapy; (2) complexities of the process of LVAD deactivation; and (3) legal and ethical considerations of LVAD deactivation. Most respondents (cardiology 92%; HPM 81%; P = .15) believed that an LVAD is a life-sustaining treatment for patients with advanced heart failure; however, 60% of cardiology vs 2% of HPM clinicians believed a patient should be imminently dying to deactivate an LVAD (P < .001). Additionally, 87% of cardiology vs 100% of HPM clinicians believed the cause of death following LVAD deactivation was from underlying disease (P < .001), with 13% of cardiology clinicians considering it to be a form of euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide. CONCLUSION: Cardiology and HPM clinicians have differing perspectives regarding LVAD deactivation. Bridging the gaps and engaging in dialog between these 2 specialties is a critical first step in creating a more cohesive approach to care for LVAD patients.

Dying With a Left Ventricular Assist Device as Destination Therapy.

BACKGROUND: Despite the ability of left ventricular assist device as destination therapy (DT-LVAD) to prolong survival for many patients with advanced heart failure, little is known about the eventual end-of-life care that patients with DT-LVAD receive. METHODS AND RESULTS: All patients undergoing DT-LVAD at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota, from January 1, 2007, to September 30, 2014, who subsequently died before July 1, 2015, were included. Information about end-of-life care was obtained from documentation in the electronic medical record. Of 89 patients who died with a DT-LVAD, the median (25th-75th percentile) time from left ventricular assist device implantation to death was 14 (4-31) months. The most common causes of death were multiorgan failure (26%), hemorrhagic stroke (24%), and progressive heart failure (21%). Nearly half (46%) of the patients saw palliative care within 1 month before death; however, only 13 (15%) patients enrolled in hospice a median 11 (range 1-315) days before death. Most patients (78%) died in the hospital, of which 88% died in the intensive care unit. In total, 49 patients had their left ventricular assist device deactivated before death, with all but 3 undergoing deactivation in the hospital. Most patients died within an hour of left ventricular assist device deactivation and all within 26 hours. CONCLUSIONS: In contrast to the general heart failure population, most patients with DT-LVAD die in the hospital and few use hospice. Further work is needed to understand these differences and to determine whether patients with DT-LVAD are receiving optimal end-of-life care.

Team Cognition As a Means to Improve Care Delivery in Critically Ill Patients With Cancer After Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation.

Hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) is an important and complex treatment modality for a variety of hematologic malignancies and some solid tumors. Although outcomes of patients who have undergone HCT and require care in intensive care units (ICUs) have improved over time, mortality rates remain high and there are significant associated costs. Lack of a team-based approach to care, especially during critical illness, is detrimental to patient autonomy and satisfaction, and to team morale, ultimately leading to poor quality of care. In this manuscript, we describe the case of a patient who had undergone HCT and was in the ICU setting, where inconsistent team interaction among the various stakeholders delivering care resulted in a lack of shared goals and poor outcomes. Team cognition is cognitive processing at the team level through interactions among team members and is reflected in dynamic communication and coordination behaviors. Although the patient received multidisciplinary care as needed in a medically complicated case, a lack of team cognition and, particularly, inconsistent communication among the dynamic teams caring for the patient, led to mixed messages being delivered with high-cost implications for the health-care system and the family. This article highlights concepts and recommendations that begin a necessary in-depth assessment of implications for clinical care and initiate a research agenda that examines the effects of team cognition on HCT teams, and, more generally, critical care of the patient with cancer.

Complex Care Options for Patients With Advanced Heart Failure Approaching End of Life.

Care for patients with advanced cardiac disease continues to evolve in a complex milieu of therapeutic options, advanced technological interventions, and efforts at improving patient-centered care and shared decision-making. Despite improvements in quality of life and survival with these interventions, optimal supportive care across the advanced illness trajectory remains diverse and heterogeneous. Herein, we outline challenges in prognostication, communication, and caregiving in advanced heart failure and review the unique needs of patients who experience frequent hospitalizations, require chronic home inotropic support, and who have implantable cardioverter-defibrillators and mechanical circulatory support in situ, to name a few.