1. |
|
|
2. |
|
|
3. |
- Ammirati, Enrico, et al.
(author)
-
Outcome of patients on heart transplant list treated with a continuous-flow left ventricular assist device : Insights from the TRans-Atlantic registry on VAd and TrAnsplant (TRAViATA)
- 2021
-
In: International Journal of Cardiology. - : Elsevier BV. - 0167-5273. ; 324
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: Geographic variations in management and outcomes of individuals supported by continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices (CF-LVAD) between the United States (US) and Europe (EU) is largely unknown. Methods: We created a retrospective, multinational registry of 524 patients who received a CF-LVAD (either HVAD or Heartmate II) between January 2008 and April 2017. Follow up spanned from date of CF-LVAD implant to post-HTx period with a median follow up of 44.8 months. Results: The cohort included 299 (57.1%) EU and 225 (42.9%) US patients. Although the US cohort was significantly older with a higher prevalence of comorbidities, survival was similar between the cohorts (US 63.1%, EU 68.4% at 5 years, unadjusted log-rank test p = 0.43).Multivariate analyses suggested that older age, higher body mass index, elevated creatinine, use of temporary mechanical circulatory support prior CF-LVAD, and implantation of HVAD were associated with increased mortality. Among CF-LVAD patients undergoing HTx, the median time on CF-LVAD support was shorter in the US, meanwhile US donors were younger. Finally, the pattern of adverse events (stroke, gastrointestinal bleedings, late right ventricular failure, and driveline infection) during support differed significantly between US and EU. Conclusions: Although waitlisted patients in the US on CF-LVAD have higher risk comorbid conditions, the overall outcome is similar in US and EU. Geographic variations with regards to donor characteristics, duration of CF-LVAD support prior to transplant, and adverse events on support can explain the disparity in the utilization of mechanical bridge to transplant strategy between US and EU.
|
|
4. |
- Ben Avraham, Binyamin, et al.
(author)
-
HFA of the ESC Position paper on the management of LVAD supported patients for the non LVAD specialist healthcare provider : Part 1: Introduction and at the non-hospital settings in the community
- 2021
-
In: ESC Heart Failure. - : Wiley. - 2055-5822. ; 8:6, s. 4394-4408
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The accepted use of left ventricular assist device (LVAD) technology as a good alternative for the treatment of patients with advanced heart failure together with the improved survival of the LVAD-supported patients on the device and the scarcity of donor hearts has significantly increased the population of LVAD-supported patients. The expected and non-expected device-related and patient-device interaction complications impose a significant burden on the medical system exceeding the capacity of the LVAD implanting centres. The ageing of the LVAD-supported patients, mainly those supported with the destination therapy indication, increases the risk for those patients to experience comorbidities common in the older population. The probability of an LVAD-supported patient presenting with medical emergency to a local emergency department, internal, or surgical ward of a non-LVAD implanting centre is increasing. The purpose of this trilogy is to supply the immediate tools needed by the non-LVAD specialized physician: ambulance clinicians, emergency ward physicians, general cardiologists, internists, anaesthesiologists, and surgeons, to comply with the medical needs of this fast-growing population of LVAD-supported patients. The different issues discussed will follow the patients pathway from the ambulance to the emergency department and from the emergency department to the internal or surgical wards and eventually to the discharge home from the hospital back to the general practitioner. In this first part of the trilogy on the management of LVAD-supported patients for the non-LVAD specialist healthcare provider, after the introduction on the assist devices technology in general, definitions and structured approach to the assessment of the LVAD-supported patient in the ambulance and emergency department is presented including cardiopulmonary resuscitation for LVAD-supported patients.
|
|
5. |
- Milicic, Davor, et al.
(author)
-
Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology position paper on the management of left ventricular assist device-supported patients for the non-left ventricular assist device specialist healthcare provider : Part 2: at the emergency department
- 2021
-
In: ESC Heart Failure. - : Wiley. - 2055-5822. ; 8:6, s. 4409-4424
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The improvement in left ventricular assist device (LVAD) technology and scarcity of donor hearts have increased dramatically the population of the LVAD-supported patients and the probability of those patients to present to the emergency department with expected and non-expected device-related and patient-device interaction complications. The ageing of the LVAD-supported patients, mainly those supported with the destination therapy indication, increases the risk for those patients to suffer from other co-morbidities common in the older population. In this second part of the trilogy on the management of LVAD-supported patients for the non-LVAD specialist healthcare provider, definitions and structured approach to the LVAD-supported patient presenting to the emergency department with bleeding, neurological event, pump thrombosis, chest pain, syncope, and other events are presented. The very challenging issue of declaring death in an LVAD-supported patient, as the circulation is artificially preserved by the device despite no other signs of life, is also discussed in detail.
|
|
6. |
- Rosano, Giuseppe, et al.
(author)
-
COVID-19 vaccination in patients with heart failure: a position paper of the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology
- 2021
-
In: European Journal of Heart Failure. - : WILEY. - 1388-9842 .- 1879-0844. ; 23:11, s. 1806-1818
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Patients with heart failure (HF) who contract SARS-CoV-2 infection are at a higher risk of cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Regardless of therapeutic attempts in COVID-19, vaccination remains the most promising global approach at present for controlling this disease. There are several concerns and misconceptions regarding the clinical indications, optimal mode of delivery, safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines for patients with HF. This document provides guidance to all healthcare professionals regarding the implementation of a COVID-19 vaccination scheme in patients with HF. COVID-19 vaccination is indicated in all patients with HF, including those who are immunocompromised (e.g. after heart transplantation receiving immunosuppressive therapy) and with frailty syndrome. It is preferable to vaccinate against COVID-19 patients with HF in an optimal clinical state, which would include clinical stability, adequate hydration and nutrition, optimized treatment of HF and other comorbidities (including iron deficiency), but corrective measures should not be allowed to delay vaccination. Patients with HF who have been vaccinated against COVID-19 need to continue precautionary measures, including the use of facemasks, hand hygiene and social distancing. Knowledge on strategies preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection (including the COVID-19 vaccination) should be included in the comprehensive educational programmes delivered to patients with HF.
|
|
7. |
- Rosano, Giuseppe M. C., et al.
(author)
-
Patient profiling in heart failure for tailoring medical therapy. A consensus document of the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology
- 2021
-
In: European Journal of Heart Failure. - : Wiley-Blackwell. - 1388-9842 .- 1879-0844. ; 23:6, s. 872-881
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Despite guideline recommendations and available evidence, implementation of treatment in heart failure (HF) is poor. The majority of patients are not prescribed drugs at target doses that have been proven to positively impact morbidity and mortality. Among others, tolerability issues related to low blood pressure, heart rate, impaired renal function or hyperkalaemia are responsible. Chronic kidney disease plays an important role as it affects up to 50% of patients with HF. Also, dynamic changes in estimated glomerular filtration rate may occur during the course of HF, resulting in inappropriate dose reduction or even discontinuation of decongestive or neurohormonal modulating therapy in clinical practice. As patients with HF are rarely naive to pharmacologic therapies, the challenge is to adequately prioritize or select the most appropriate up-titration schedule according to patient profile. In this consensus document, we identified nine patient profiles that may be relevant for treatment implementation in HF patients with a reduced ejection fraction. These profiles take into account heart rate (70 bpm), the presence of atrial fibrillation, symptomatic low blood pressure, estimated glomerular filtration rate (30 mL/min/1.73 m(2)) or hyperkalaemia. The pre-discharge patient, frequently still congestive, is also addressed. A personalized approach, adjusting guideline-directed medical therapy to patient profile, may allow to achieve a better and more comprehensive therapy for each individual patient than the more traditional, forced titration of each drug class before initiating treatment with the next.
|
|