Predictors of Severe Right Ventricular Failure After Implantable Left Ventricular Assist Device Insertion: Analysis of 245 Patients

BackgroundInsertion of an implantable left ventricular assist device (LVAD) complicated by early right ventricular (RV) failure has a poor prognosis and is largely unpredictable. Prediction of RV failure after LVAD placement would lead to more precise patient selection and optimal device selection. Methods and ResultsWe reviewed data from 245 patients (mean age, 54±11 years; 85% male) with 189 HeartMate (77%) and 56 Novacor (23%) LVADs. Ischemic cardiomyopathy predominated (65%), and 29% had dilated cardiomyopathy. Overall, RV assist device (RVAD) support was required after LVAD insertion for 23 patients (9%). We compared clinical and hemodynamic parameters before LVAD insertion between RVAD (n=23) and No-RVAD patients (n=222) to determine preoperative risk factors for severe RV failure. By univariate analysis, female gender, small body surface area, nonischemic etiology, preoperative mechanical ventilation, circulatory support before LVAD insertion, low mean and diastolic pulmonary artery pressures (PAPs), low RV stroke work (RVSW), and low RVSW index (RVSWI) were significantly associated with RVAD use. Elevated PAP and pulmonary vascular resistance were not risk factors. Risk factors by multivariable logistic regression were preoperative circulatory support (odds ratio [OR], 5.3), female gender (OR, 4.5), and nonischemic etiology (OR, 3.3). ConclusionsThe need for circulatory support, female gender, and nonischemic etiology were the most significant predictors for RVAD use after LVAD insertion. Regarding hemodynamics, low PAP and low RVSWI, reflecting low RV contractility, were important parameters. This information may lead to better patient selection for isolated LVAD implantation.

[1]  C. V. Van Meter,et al.  Right heart failure: best treated by avoidance. , 2001, The Annals of thoracic surgery.

[2]  J. Gorcsan,et al.  Right ventricular performance and contractile reserve in patients with severe heart failure. Assessment by pressure-area relations and association with outcome. , 1996, Circulation.

[3]  M C Oz,et al.  Long-term use of a left ventricular assist device for end-stage heart failure. , 2001, The New England journal of medicine.

[4]  J. Heo,et al.  Differentiation between primary dilated cardiomyopathy and ischemic cardiomyopathy based on right ventricular performance. , 1992, American heart journal.

[5]  J F Antaki,et al.  HeartMate II left ventricular assist system: from concept to first clinical use. , 2001, The Annals of thoracic surgery.

[6]  G. Tenderich,et al.  Device and patient management in a bridge-to-transplant setting. , 2001, The Annals of thoracic surgery.

[7]  M. Oz,et al.  Use of aprotinin in LVAD recipients reduces blood loss, blood use, and perioperative mortality. , 1995, The Annals of thoracic surgery.

[8]  M. Oz,et al.  Right ventricular dysfunction and organ failure in left ventricular assist device recipients: a continuing problem. , 2002, The Annals of thoracic surgery.

[9]  P M Portner,et al.  Mechanical Circulatory Support for Advanced Heart Failure: Effect of Patient Selection on Outcome , 2001, Circulation.

[10]  G P Noon,et al.  Clinical experience with the MicroMed DeBakey ventricular assist device. , 2001, The Annals of thoracic surgery.

[11]  L. Gray,et al.  Preoperative and postoperative comparison of patients with univentricular and biventricular support with the thoratec ventricular assist device as a bridge to cardiac transplantation. , 1997, The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery.

[12]  P. McCarthy,et al.  One hundred patients with the HeartMate left ventricular assist device: evolving concepts and technology. , 1998, The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery.

[13]  Y. Tanoue,et al.  Use of transesophageal echocardiography for postoperative evaluation of right ventricular function. , 1999, The Annals of thoracic surgery.

[14]  S. Bolling,et al.  Extracorporeal life support to left ventricular assist device bridge to heart transplant: A strategy to optimize survival and resource utilization. , 1999, Circulation.

[15]  N G Smedira,et al.  Preoperative risk factors for right ventricular failure after implantable left ventricular assist device insertion. , 1999, The Annals of thoracic surgery.

[16]  M. Oz,et al.  Bridge experience with long-term implantable left ventricular assist devices. Are they an alternative to transplantation? , 1997, Circulation.

[17]  R K Jarvik,et al.  Research and development of an implantable, axial-flow left ventricular assist device: the Jarvik 2000 Heart. , 2001, The Annals of thoracic surgery.

[18]  G Rosenberg,et al.  The LionHeart LVD-2000: a completely implanted left ventricular assist device for chronic circulatory support. , 2001, The Annals of thoracic surgery.

[19]  B. Griffith,et al.  Transplant candidate's clinical status rather than right ventricular function defines need for univentricular versus biventricular support. , 1996, The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery.

[20]  O. Frazier,et al.  Improved Mortality and Rehabilitation of Transplant Candidates Treated with a Long‐Term Implantable Left Ventricular Assist System , 1995, Annals of surgery.

[21]  C. H. V. Meter Right heart failure: best treated by avoidance. , 2001 .

[22]  M C Oz,et al.  100 long-term implantable left ventricular assist devices: the Columbia Presbyterian interim experience. , 1999, The Annals of thoracic surgery.

[23]  R. Dowling,et al.  Initial Experience with the AbioCor Implantable Replacement Heart at the University of Louisville , 2000, ASAIO journal.