4.6 Article Proceedings Paper

HeartWare Ventricular Assist Device Cannula Position and Hemocompatibility-Related Adverse Events

Journal

ANNALS OF THORACIC SURGERY
Volume 110, Issue 3, Pages 911-917

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2019.12.049

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Abbott
  2. Medtronic
  3. Teraura-Sayoko Memorial Scholarship Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background. HeartWare ventricular assist device (HVAD) cannula position is associated with hemodynamics and heart failure readmissions. However, its impact on hemocompatibility-related adverse events (HRAEs) remains uncertain. Methods. HVAD patients were followed for 1 year after index hospitalization, when cannula coronal angle was quantified from chest x-ray film. Invasive right heart catheterization and transthoracic echocardiography were performed. One-year occurrences of each HRAE were compared between those with and without a cannula coronal angle of greater than 65 degrees. Results. Among 63 HVAD patients (median age 60 years, 63% male), 10 (16%) had a cannula coronal angle greater than 65 degrees. The wide-angle group had elevated intracardiac pressures and lower pulmonary artery pulsatility index (P <.05). They also had reduced right ventricular function by echocardiography. Freedom from HRAEs tended to be lower in the wide-angle group (24% vs 62%; P = .11). The rate of gastrointestinal bleeding was significantly higher in the greater than 65 degrees group (0.90 events/year vs 0.40 events/year; P = .013). The rates of stroke and pump thrombosis were statistically comparable irrespective of cannula angle (P >.05). Conclusions. HVAD cannula coronal angle was associated with reduced right ventricular function and HRAEs. Prospective studies evaluating surgical techniques to ensure optimal device positioning and its effects on HRAEs are warranted. (C) 2020 by The Society of Thoracic Surgeons.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available