TY - JOUR
T1 - Concomitant valve procedures in patients undergoing continuous-flow left ventricular assist device implantation
T2 - A single-center experience
AU - Sugiura, Tadahisa
AU - Kurihara, Chitaru
AU - Kawabori, Masashi
AU - Critsinelis, Andre C.
AU - Wang, Suwei
AU - Civitello, Andrew B.
AU - Rosengart, Todd K.
AU - Frazier, O. H.
AU - Morgan, Jeffrey A.
N1 - Funding Information:
The authors thank MacArthur A. Elayda, MD, PhD, of the Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology at the Texas Heart Institute, for his timely help in analyzing our large data set. The Section of Scientific Publications at Texas Heart Institute provided editorial support.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2019 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery
PY - 2019/10
Y1 - 2019/10
N2 - Objective: Long-term support with continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices (CF-LVADs) has improved the outcomes of patients with end-stage heart failure. However, valve disease management in patients who undergo CF-LVAD implantation remains controversial. The aim of this study was to assess our single-center experience with patients who underwent a concomitant valve procedure during implantation of a CF-LVAD. Methods: From November 2003 through March 2016, 526 patients underwent primary CF-LVAD implantation with a HeartMate II (St Jude Inc, St Paul, Minn; n = 403) or HeartWare (Medtronic, Minneapolis, Minn; n = 123) device at our center. Of those, 91 underwent a concomitant valve procedure during implantation (CF-LVAD+valve procedure group), whereas 435 did not (CF-LVAD–only group). We compared preoperative characteristics and short-term and mid-term survival rates between these groups. Results: The concomitant valve procedures performed included 13 tricuspid valve repairs, 19 aortic valve repairs or replacements, 30 mitral valve repairs or replacements, and 29 double valve repairs or replacements. Survival rates at 1 month, 6 months, 12 months, and 24 months were 90.3%, 81.4%, 74.9%, and 67.4%, respectively, for the CF-LVAD–only group and 89.0%, 75.8%, 70.3%, and 65.9%, respectively, for the CF-LVAD+valve procedure group (P = .55). The results of Cox regression multivariable modeling showed that performing a concomitant valve procedure was not an independent predictor of mortality (hazard ratio, 1.29; 95% confidence interval, 0.96-1.74; P = .08). Conclusions: In our experience, performing a concomitant valve procedure during CF-LVAD implantation was not associated with an increased mortality rate. The decision to perform a concomitant valve procedure should be made primarily on the basis of clinical indications for the procedure.
AB - Objective: Long-term support with continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices (CF-LVADs) has improved the outcomes of patients with end-stage heart failure. However, valve disease management in patients who undergo CF-LVAD implantation remains controversial. The aim of this study was to assess our single-center experience with patients who underwent a concomitant valve procedure during implantation of a CF-LVAD. Methods: From November 2003 through March 2016, 526 patients underwent primary CF-LVAD implantation with a HeartMate II (St Jude Inc, St Paul, Minn; n = 403) or HeartWare (Medtronic, Minneapolis, Minn; n = 123) device at our center. Of those, 91 underwent a concomitant valve procedure during implantation (CF-LVAD+valve procedure group), whereas 435 did not (CF-LVAD–only group). We compared preoperative characteristics and short-term and mid-term survival rates between these groups. Results: The concomitant valve procedures performed included 13 tricuspid valve repairs, 19 aortic valve repairs or replacements, 30 mitral valve repairs or replacements, and 29 double valve repairs or replacements. Survival rates at 1 month, 6 months, 12 months, and 24 months were 90.3%, 81.4%, 74.9%, and 67.4%, respectively, for the CF-LVAD–only group and 89.0%, 75.8%, 70.3%, and 65.9%, respectively, for the CF-LVAD+valve procedure group (P = .55). The results of Cox regression multivariable modeling showed that performing a concomitant valve procedure was not an independent predictor of mortality (hazard ratio, 1.29; 95% confidence interval, 0.96-1.74; P = .08). Conclusions: In our experience, performing a concomitant valve procedure during CF-LVAD implantation was not associated with an increased mortality rate. The decision to perform a concomitant valve procedure should be made primarily on the basis of clinical indications for the procedure.
KW - concomitant valve procedures
KW - heart failure
KW - left ventricular assist device
KW - valve disease
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85062945559&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85062945559&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2019.02.040
DO - 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2019.02.040
M3 - Article
C2 - 30904255
AN - SCOPUS:85062945559
SN - 0022-5223
VL - 158
SP - 1083-1089.e1
JO - Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
JF - Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
IS - 4
ER -