-
Comparative Study
Predicting right ventricular failure in the modern, continuous flow left ventricular assist device era.
- Pavan Atluri, Andrew B Goldstone, Alex S Fairman, John W MacArthur, Yasuhiro Shudo, Jeffrey E Cohen, Alexandra L Acker, William Hiesinger, Jessica L Howard, Michael A Acker, and Y Joseph Woo.
- Division of Cardiovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104, USA.
- Ann. Thorac. Surg. 2013 Sep 1;96(3):857-63; discussion 863-4.
BackgroundIn the era of destination continuous flow left ventricular assist devices (LVAD), the decision of whether a patient will tolerate isolated LVAD support or will need biventricular support (BIVAD) can be challenging. Incorrect decision making with delayed right ventricular (RV) assist device implantation results in increased morbidity and mortality. Continuous flow LVADs have been shown to decrease pulmonary hypertension and improve RV function. We undertook this study to determine predictors in the continuous flow LVAD era that identify patients who are candidates for isolated LVAD therapy as opposed to biventricular support.MethodsWe reviewed demographic, hemodynamic, laboratory, and echocardiographic variables for 218 patients who underwent VAD implant from 2003 through 2011 (LVAD=167, BIVAD=51), during the era of continuous flow LVADs.ResultsFifty preoperative risk factors were compared between patients who were successfully managed with an LVAD and those who required a BIVAD. Seventeen variables demonstrated statistical significance by univariate analysis. Multivariable logistic regression analysis identified central venous pressure>15 mmHg (OR 2.0, "C"), severe RV dysfunction (OR 3.7, "R"), preoperative intubation (OR 4.3, "I"), severe tricuspid regurgitation (OR 4.1, "T"), heart rate>100 (OR 2.0, Tachycardia-"T")-CRITT as the major criteria predictive of the need for biventricular support. Utilizing these data, a highly sensitive and easy to use risk score for determining RV failure was generated that outperformed other established risk stratification tools.ConclusionsWe present a preoperative risk calculator to determine suitability of a patient for isolated LVAD support in the current continuous flow ventricular assist device era.Copyright © 2013 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*
,_underline_
or**bold**
. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>
and subscript<sub>text</sub>
. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3.
, hyphens-
or asterisks*
. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
- Images can be included with:
![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
- For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)
inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]
to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote.
.