Donation After Circulatory Death Heart Transplantation: A Narrative Review.

Heart transplantation is the definitive treatment for refractory, end-stage heart failure. The number of patients awaiting transplantation far exceeds available organs. In an effort to expand the donor pool, donation after circulatory death (DCD) heart transplantation has garnered renewed interest. Unlike donation after brain death, DCD donors do not meet the criteria for brain death and are dependent on life-sustaining therapies. Procurement can include a direct strategy or a normothermic regional perfusion, whereby there is restoration of perfusion to the organ before explantation. There are new developments in cold storage and ex vivo perfusion strategies. Since its inception, there has been a steady improvement in post-transplant outcomes, largely attributed to advancements in operative and procurement strategies. In this narrative review, the authors address the unique considerations of DCD heart transplantation, including withdrawal of care, the logistics of procuring and resuscitating organs, outcomes compared with standard donation after brain death, and ethical considerations.

Extrinsic Outflow Graft Obstruction of the HeartMate 3 LVAD: A State-of-the-Art Review.

While notable improvements in survival, incidence of hemocompatibility-related adverse events, hospitalizations and cost have been demonstrated with the only commercially available durable left ventricular assist device, a category of pump malfunctions characterized by outflow graft obstruction has been noted with broader use and clinical follow up of recipients of this technology. Of particular concern, is the accumulation of acellular biodebris between the outflow graft and bend relief covering the outflow graft at its origin with the pump (which we term extrinsic outflow graft obstruction at the bend relief, or EOGO-BR). This process tends to be insidious, occurs late in the postoperative course, can be challenging to diagnose, and can result in significant morbidity and mortality. Herein we provide a review of this complication and outline diagnostic, treatment and preventive strategies.

Cost effectiveness of commercial portable ex vivo lung perfusion at a low-volume US lung transplant center.

BACKGROUND: Portable ex vivo lung perfusion during lung transplantation is a resource-intensive technology. In light of its increasing use, we evaluated the cost-effectiveness of ex vivo lung perfusion at a low-volume lung transplant center in the USA. METHODS: Patients listed for lung transplantation (2015-2021) in the United Network for Organ Sharing database were included. Quality-of-life was approximated by Karnofsky Performance Status scores 1-year post-transplant. Total transplantation encounter and 1-year follow-up costs accrued by our academic center for patients listed from 2018 to 2021 were obtained. Cost-effectiveness was calculated by evaluating the number of patients attaining various Karnofsky scores relative to cost. RESULTS: Of the 13 930 adult patients who underwent lung transplant in the United Network for Organ Sharing database, 13 477 (96.7%) used static cold storage and 453 (3.3%) used ex vivo lung perfusion, compared to 30/58 (51.7%) and 28/58 (48.3%), respectively, at our center. Compared to static cold storage, median total costs at 1 year were higher for ex vivo lung perfusion ($918 000 vs. $516 000; p = 0.007) along with the cost of living 1 year with a Karnofsky functional status of 100 after transplant ($1 290 000 vs. $841 000). In simulated scenarios, each Karnofsky-adjusted life year gained by ex vivo lung perfusion was 1.00-1.72 times more expensive. CONCLUSIONS: Portable ex vivo lung perfusion is not currently cost-effective at a low-volume transplant centers in the USA, being 1.53 times more expensive per Karnofsky-adjusted life year. Improving donor lung and/or recipient biology during ex vivo lung perfusion may improve its utility for routine transplantation.

Ventricular assist device using a thoracotomy-based implant technique: Multi-Center Implantation of the HeartMate 3 in Subjects With Heart Failure Using Surgical Techniques Other Than Full Median Sternotomy (HM3 SWIFT).

OBJECTIVES: The HeartMate 3 (Abbott) left ventricular assist device provides substantial improvement in long-term morbidity and mortality in patients with advanced heart failure. The Implantation of the HeartMate 3 in Subjects With Heart Failure Using Surgical Techniques Other Than Full Median Sternotomy study compares thoracotomy-based implantation clinical outcomes with standard median sternotomy. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, multicenter, single-arm study in patients eligible for HeartMate 3 implantation with thoracotomy-based surgical technique (bilateral thoracotomy or partial upper sternotomy with left thoracotomy). The composite primary end point was survival free of disabling stroke (modified Rankin score >3), or reoperation to remove or replace a malfunctioning device, or conversion to median sternotomy at 6-months postimplant (elective transplants were treated as a success). The primary end point (noninferiority, -15% margin) was assessed with >90% power compared with a propensity score-matched cohort (ratio 1:2) derived from the Multi-Center Study of MagLev Technology in Patients Undergoing Mechanical Circulatory Support Therapy With HeartMate 3 continued access protocol. RESULTS: The study enrolled 102 patients between December 2020 and July 2022 in the thoracotomy-based arm at 23 North American centers. Follow-up concluded in December 2022. In the Implantation of the HeartMate 3 in Subjects With Heart Failure Using Surgical Techniques Other Than Full Median Sternotomy study group, noninferiority criteria was met (absolute between-group difference, -1.2%; Farrington Manning lower 1-sided 95% CI, -9.3%; P < .0025) and event-free survival was not different (85.0% vs 86.2%; hazard ratio, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.58-2.10). Length of stay with thoracotomy-based implant was longer (median, 20 vs 17 days; P = .03). No differences were observed for blood product utilization, adverse events (including right heart failure), functional status, and quality of life between cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Thoracotomy-based implantation of the HeartMate 3 left ventricular assist device is noninferior to implantation via standard full sternotomy. This study supports thoracotomy-based implantation as an additional standard for surgical implantation of the HeartMate 3 left ventricular assist device.

Increasing Utilization of Extended Criteria Donor Hearts for Transplantation: The OCS Heart EXPAND Trial.

BACKGROUND: Extended criteria donor (ECD) hearts available with donation after brain death (DBD) are underutilized for transplantation due to limitations of cold storage. OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated use of an extracorporeal perfusion system on donor heart utilization and post-transplant outcomes in ECD DBD hearts. METHODS: In this prospective, single-arm, multicenter study, adult heart transplant recipients received ECD hearts using an extracorporeal perfusion system if hearts met study criteria. The primary outcome was a composite of 30-day survival and absence of severe primary graft dysfunction (PGD). Secondary outcomes were donor heart utilization rate, 30-day survival, and incidence of severe PGD. The safety outcome was the mean number of heart graft-related serious adverse events within 30 days. Additional outcomes included survival through 2 years benchmarked to concurrent nonrandomized control subjects. RESULTS: A total of 173 ECD DBD hearts were perfused; 150 (87%) were successfully transplanted; 23 (13%) did not meet study transplantation criteria. At 30 days, 92% of patients had survived and had no severe PGD. The 30-day survival was 97%, and the incidence of severe PGD was 6.7%. The mean number of heart graft-related serious adverse events within 30 days was 0.17 (95% CI: 0.11-0.23). Patient survival was 93%, 89%, and 86% at 6, 12, and 24 months, respectively, and was comparable with concurrent nonrandomized control subjects. CONCLUSIONS: Use of an extracorporeal perfusion system resulted in successfully transplanting 87% of donor hearts with excellent patient survival to 2 years post-transplant and low rates of severe PGD. The ability to safely use ECD DBD hearts could substantially increase the number of heart transplants and expand access to patients in need. (International EXPAND Heart Pivotal Trial [EXPANDHeart]; NCT02323321; Heart EXPAND Continued Access Protocol; NCT03835754).

Impact of prophylactic donor heart tricuspid valve annuloplasty on outcomes in heart transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Tricuspid regurgitation(TR) following heart transplantation could adversely affect clinical outcomes. In an effort to reduce the incidence of TR, prophylactic donor heart tricuspid valve annuloplasty has been performed during heart transplantation in our institution. We assessed early and long-term outcomes. METHODS: Between August 2011 and August 2021, 349 patients who underwent prophylactic tricuspid valve annuloplasty were included. Tricuspid valve annuloplasty was performed using the DeVega annuloplasty technique. The clinical outcomes of the interests included complete atrioventricular block requiring pacemaker implantation, the occurrence of significant TR(defined as moderate or greater), and survival. Long-term survival was compared in patients with and without significant TR using the Kaplan-Meier method. The Cox proportional hazards regression with time-dependent covariate analysis was used to see if significant TR affected the long-term survival. RESULTS: There was one patient(0.3%) who required pacemaker implantation for complete atrioventricular block. No patients developed tricuspid valve stenosis that required intervention. Significant TR developed in 31 patients(8.9%) during the follow-up period. The survival rate of patients who developed significant TR was significantly lower than that of those who did not(log rank < 0.01). Significant TR was associated with the long-term mortality(HR2.92, 95%CI 1.47-5.82, p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Prophylactic donor heart tricuspid valve annuloplasty has the potential to reduce the occurrence of significant TR and can be performed safely. The significant TR that developed in patients with prophylactic annuloplasty negatively affected survival and was an independent predictor of long-term mortality.

Predictors of 5-Year Mortality in Patients Managed With a Magnetically Levitated Left Ventricular Assist Device.

BACKGROUND: In advanced heart failure patients implanted with a fully magnetically levitated HeartMate 3 (HM3, Abbott) left ventricular assist device (LVAD), it is unknown how preimplant factors and postimplant index hospitalization events influence 5-year mortality in those able to be discharged. OBJECTIVES: The goal was to identify risk predictors of mortality through 5 years among HM3 LVAD recipients conditional on discharge from index hospitalization in the MOMENTUM 3 pivotal trial. METHODS: This analysis evaluated 485 of 515 (94%) patients discharged after implantation of the HM3 LVAD. Preimplant (baseline), implant surgery, and index hospitalization characteristics were analyzed individually, and as multivariable predictors for mortality risk through 5 years. RESULTS: Cumulative 5-year mortality in the cohort (median age: 62 years, 80% male, 65% White, 61% destination therapy due to transplant ineligibility) was 38%. Two preimplant characteristics (elevated blood urea nitrogen and prior coronary artery bypass graft or valve procedure) and 3 postimplant characteristics (hemocompatibility-related adverse events, ventricular arrhythmias, and estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 mL/min/1.73 m2 at discharge) were predictors of 5-year mortality. In 171 of 485 patients (35.3%) without any risk predictors, 5-year mortality was reduced to 22.6% (95% CI: 15.4%-32.7%). Even among those with 1 or more predictors, mortality was <50% at 5 years (45.7% [95% CI: 39.0%-52.8%]). CONCLUSIONS: Long-term survival in successfully discharged HM3 LVAD recipients is largely influenced by clinical events experienced during the index surgical hospitalization in tandem with baseline factors, with mortality of <50% at 5 years. In patients without identified predictors of risk, long-term 5-year mortality is low and rivals that achieved with heart transplantation, even though most were implanted with destination therapy intent. (MOMENTUM 3 IDE Clinical Study Protocol, NCT02224755; MOMENTUM 3 Pivotal Cohort Extended Follow-up PAS, NCT03982979).

Concomitant left atrial appendage closure during left ventricular assist device surgery can reduce ischaemic cerebrovascular accidents.

OBJECTIVES: It remains unknown if the left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) at the time of left ventricular assist device (LVAD) surgery can reduce ischaemic cerebrovascular accidents. METHODS: Consecutive 310 patients who underwent LVAD surgery with HeartMate II or 3 between January 2012 and November 2021 were included in this study. The cohort was divided into 2 groups: patients with LAAC (group A) and without LAAC (group B). We compared the clinical outcomes including the incidence of cerebrovascular accident between 2 groups. RESULTS: Ninety-eight patients were included in group A, and 212 patients in group B. There were no significant differences between 2 groups in age, preoperative CHADS2 score and history of atrial fibrillation. In-hospital mortality did not differ significantly between the 2 groups (group A: 7.1%, group B: 12.3%, P = 0.16). Thirty-seven patients (11.9%) experienced ischaemic cerebrovascular accident (5 patients in group A and 32 patients in group B). The cumulative incidence from ischaemic cerebrovascular accidents in group A (5.3% at 12 months and 5.3% at 36 months) was significantly lower than that in group B (8.2% at 12 months and 16.8% at 36 months; P = 0.017). In a multivariable competing risk analysis, LAAC was associated with reducing ischaemic cerebrovascular accidents (hazard ratio 0.38, 95% confidence interval 0.15-0.97, P = 0.043). CONCLUSIONS: Concomitant LAAC in LVAD surgery can reduce ischaemic cerebrovascular accidents without increasing perioperative mortality and complications.

Intermacs quarterly report analysis to monitor longitudinal outcomes in a centrifugal flow assist device.

In June 2021, HVAD System distribution ceased due to observational data demonstrating increased mortality and neurological events compared to another commercial device, and a device malfunction with delay or failure to restart, especially in certain subpopulations. To assess ongoing risk for patients on support following subsequent device recalls, the manufacturer's Intermacs HVAD System 2022 Quarterly Reports were queried to identify mortality and adverse events trends in a contemporary cohort of 3110 primary HVAD implantations since October 2017, stratified by year-of-implant. Mean duration of support was 21 ± 16 months, with 33% alive on original device, 25% transplanted, 6% undergoing device exchange, 4% recovered, and 32% expired. Kaplan-Meier and event-per-patient-year estimates for survival, freedom from device explant, stroke, and pump thrombus were similar across year-of-implant. Following market withdrawal and recent device recalls, there appears to be no increase in mortality, stroke, pump thrombus, or explant for HVAD-supported patients. Quarterly report monitoring is ongoing.

Adverse Hemodynamic Consequences of Continuous Left Ventricular Mechanical Support: JACC Review Topic of the Week.

Left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) provide lifesaving therapy for patients with advanced heart failure. The recognition of pump thrombosis, stroke, and nonsurgical bleeding as hemocompatibility-related adverse events (HRAEs) led to pump design improvements and reduced adverse event rates. However, continuous flow can predispose patients to right-sided heart failure (RHF) and aortic insufficiency (AI), especially as patients live longer with their device. Given the hemodynamic contributions to AI and RHF, these comorbidities can be classified as hemodynamic-related events (HDREs). Hemodynamic-driven events are time dependent and often manifest later than HRAEs. This review examines the emerging strategies to mitigate HDREs, with a focus on defining best practices for AI and RHF. As we head into the next generation of LVAD technology, it is important to differentiate HDREs from HRAEs so that we can continue to advance the field and improve the true durability of the pump-patient continuum.

Transplantation Outcomes with Donor Hearts after Circulatory Death.

BACKGROUND: Data showing the efficacy and safety of the transplantation of hearts obtained from donors after circulatory death as compared with hearts obtained from donors after brain death are limited. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, noninferiority trial in which adult candidates for heart transplantation were assigned in a 3:1 ratio to receive a heart after the circulatory death of the donor or a heart from a donor after brain death if that heart was available first (circulatory-death group) or to receive only a heart that had been preserved with the use of traditional cold storage after the brain death of the donor (brain-death group). The primary end point was the risk-adjusted survival at 6 months in the as-treated circulatory-death group as compared with the brain-death group. The primary safety end point was serious adverse events associated with the heart graft at 30 days after transplantation. RESULTS: A total of 180 patients underwent transplantation; 90 (assigned to the circulatory-death group) received a heart donated after circulatory death and 90 (regardless of group assignment) received a heart donated after brain death. A total of 166 transplant recipients were included in the as-treated primary analysis (80 who received a heart from a circulatory-death donor and 86 who received a heart from a brain-death donor). The risk-adjusted 6-month survival in the as-treated population was 94% (95% confidence interval [CI], 88 to 99) among recipients of a heart from a circulatory-death donor, as compared with 90% (95% CI, 84 to 97) among recipients of a heart from a brain-death donor (least-squares mean difference, -3 percentage points; 90% CI, -10 to 3; P<0.001 for noninferiority [margin, 20 percentage points]). There were no substantial between-group differences in the mean per-patient number of serious adverse events associated with the heart graft at 30 days after transplantation. CONCLUSIONS: In this trial, risk-adjusted survival at 6 months after transplantation with a donor heart that had been reanimated and assessed with the use of extracorporeal nonischemic perfusion after circulatory death was not inferior to that after standard-care transplantation with a donor heart that had been preserved with the use of cold storage after brain death. (Funded by TransMedics; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03831048.).

Concurrent valvular procedures during left ventricular assist device implantation and outcomes: A comprehensive analysis of the Multicenter Study of MagLev Technology in Patients Undergoing Mechanical Circulatory Support Therapy With HeartMate 3 trial portfolio.

BACKGROUND: Correction of valvular disease is often undertaken during left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation with uncertain benefit. We analyzed clinical outcomes with HeartMate 3 (HM3; Abbott) LVAD implantation in those with various concurrent valve procedures (HM3+VP) with those with an isolated LVAD implant (HM3 alone). METHODS: The study included 2200 patients with HM3 implanted within the Multicenter Study of MagLev Technology in Patients Undergoing Mechanical Circulatory Support Therapy with HeartMate 3 (MOMENTUM 3) trial portfolio who underwent 820 concurrent procedures among which 466 (21.8%) were HM3+VP. VPs included 101 aortic, 61 mitral, 163 tricuspid; 85 patients had multiple VPs. Perioperative complications, major adverse events, and survival were analyzed. RESULTS: Patients who underwent HM3+VP had higher-acuity Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support (INTERMACS) profiles (1-2: 41% vs 31%) compared with no VPs (P < .05). The cardiopulmonary bypass time (124 vs 76 minutes; P < .0001) and hospital length of stay (20 vs 18 days; P < .0001) were longer in HM3+VP. A higher incidence of stroke (4.9% vs 2.4%), bleeding (33.9% vs 23.8%), and right heart failure (41.5% vs 29.6%) was noted in HM3+VP at 0 to 30 days (P < .01), with no difference in 30-day mortality (3.9% vs 3.3%) or 2-year survival (81.7% vs 80.8%). Analysis of individual VP showed no differences in survival compared to HM3 alone. No differences were noted among patients with either significant mitral (moderate or worse) or tricuspid (moderate or worse) regurgitation with or without corrective surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Concurrent VPs, commonly performed during LVAD implantation, are associated with increased morbidity during the index hospitalization, with no effect on short- and long-term survival. There is sufficient equipoise to consider a randomized trial on the benefit of commonly performed VPs (such as mitral or tricuspid regurgitation correction), during LVAD implantation.

The prognostic role of advanced hemodynamic variables in patients with left ventricular assist devices.

BACKGROUND: Invasive hemodynamic variables obtained from right heart catheterization have been used for risk-stratifying patients with advanced heart failure (HF). However, there is a paucity of data on the prognostic value of invasive hemodynamic variables in patients with left ventricular assist devices (LVAD). We hypothesized that cardiac power output (CPO), cardiac power efficiency (CPE), and left ventricular stroke work index (LVSWI) can serve as prognostic markers in patients with LVADs. METHODS: Baseline hemodynamic data from patients who had LVAD ramp studies at our institution from 4/2014 to 7/2018 were prospectively collected, from which advanced hemodynamic variables (CPO, CPE, and LVSWI) were retrospectively analyzed. Univariate and multivariable analyses were performed for hemocompatibility-related adverse events (HRAE), HF admissions, and mortality. RESULTS: Ninety-one participants (age 61 ± 11 years, 34% women, 40% Black or African American, and 38% ischemic cardiomyopathy) were analyzed. Low CPE was significantly associated with mortality (HR 2.42, 95% CI 1.02-5.74, p = 0.045) in univariate analysis and Kaplan-Meier analysis (p = 0.04). Low LVSWI was significantly associated with mortality (HR 2.13, 95% CI 1.09-4.17, p = 0.03) in univariate analysis and Kaplan-Meier analysis (p = 0.02). CPO was not associated with mortality. CPO, CPE, and LVSWI were not associated with HRAE or HF admissions. CONCLUSIONS: Advanced hemodynamic variables can serve as prognostic indicators for patients with LVADs. Low CPE and LVSWI are prognostic for higher mortality, but no variables were associated with HF admissions or HRAEs.

Decreasing blood wastage during ex vivo lung perfusion recovery through utilization of thermal control technology.

BACKGROUND: The Organ Care System (OCS) is a revolutionary ex vivo organ perfusion technology that can potentially expand the organ retrieval range. The OCS Lung device uses packed red blood cells (pRBC) with a proprietary solution. We report the ability to reduce blood waste during this procedure by using a thermal packaging solution in conjunction with the OCS platform. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all OCS Lung recoveries performed by our recovery team, using pRBCfrom May 2019 to January 2021. Initially, units were stored using passive refrigeration with the Performance cooler at a temperature range of 1-6°C for 4 h. Subsequently, thermal control technology with the ProMed cooler was utilized to maintain the same temperature range for 72 h. RESULTS: Twenty-three recoveries were initiated with 63 pRBC. The Performance cooler was used for 8, while the ProMed cooler for 13. 37.5% of pRBC transported with the Performance cooler was used within the validated time range, while 25.0% were used beyond the validated time range based on clinical judgment. In addition, 37.5% of pRBC transported with the Performance cooler were returned to the institution after canceled recoveries with an estimated loss of $1800; the ProMed cooler had no wastage. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that using an advanced thermal packaging solution facilitates proper storage of pRBC and represents an advancement for extended donor lung preservation. The elimination of blood wastage in this initial study portends ongoing benefits for the limited blood supply and reduced cost.

Five-Year Outcomes in Patients With Fully Magnetically Levitated vs Axial-Flow Left Ventricular Assist Devices in the MOMENTUM 3 Randomized Trial.

Importance: Although durable left ventricular assist device (LVAD) therapy has emerged as an important treatment option for patients with advanced heart failure refractory to pharmacological support, outcomes, including survival, beyond 2 years remain poorly characterized. Objective: To report the composite end point of survival to transplant, recovery, or LVAD support free of debilitating stroke (Modified Rankin Scale score >3) or reoperation to replace the pump 5 years after the implant in participants who received the fully magnetically levitated centrifugal-flow HeartMate 3 or axial-flow HeartMate II LVAD in the MOMENTUM 3 randomized trial and were still receiving LVAD therapy at the 2-year follow-up. Design, Setting, and Participants: This observational study was a 5-year follow-up of the MOMENTUM 3 trial, conducted in 69 US centers, that demonstrated superiority of the centrifugal-flow LVAD to the axial-flow pump with respect to survival to transplant, recovery, or LVAD support free of debilitating stroke or reoperation to replace the pump at 2 years. A total of 295 patients were enrolled between June 2019 to April 2021 in the extended-phase study, with 5-year follow-up completed in September 2021. Exposures: Of 1020 patients in the investigational device exemption per-protocol population, 536 were still receiving LVAD support at 2 years, of whom 289 received the centrifugal-flow pump and 247 received the axial-flow pump. Main Outcomes and Measures: There were 10 end points evaluated at 5 years in the per-protocol population, including a composite of survival to transplant, recovery, or LVAD support free of debilitating stroke or reoperation to replace the pump between the centrifugal-flow and axial-flow pump groups and overall survival between the 2 groups. Results: A total of 477 patients (295 enrolled and 182 provided limited data) of 536 patients still receiving LVAD support at 2 years contributed to the extended-phase analysis (median age, 62 y; 86 [18%] women). The 5-year Kaplan-Meier estimate of survival to transplant, recovery, or LVAD support free of debilitating stroke or reoperation to replace the pump in the centrifugal-flow vs axial-flow group was 54.0% vs 29.7% (hazard ratio, 0.55 [95% CI, 0.45-0.67]; P < .001). Overall Kaplan-Meier survival was 58.4% in the centrifugal-flow group vs 43.7% in the axial-flow group (hazard ratio, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.58-0.89]; P = .003). Serious adverse events of stroke, bleeding, and pump thrombosis were less frequent in the centrifugal-flow pump group. Conclusions and Relevance: In this observational follow-up study of patients from the MOMENTUM 3 randomized trial, per-protocol analyses found that receipt of a fully magnetically levitated centrifugal-flow LVAD vs axial-flow LVAD was associated with a better composite outcome and higher likelihood of overall survival at 5 years. These findings support the use of the fully magnetically levitated LVAD. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02224755 and NCT03982979.