Postoperative Pulmonary Artery Pulsatility Index Improves Prediction of Right Ventricular Failure After Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation

Objectives: This study evaluated whether the postoperative pulmonary artery pulsatility index (PAPi) is associated with postoperative right ventricular dysfunction after durable left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation.Design: Single-center retrospective observational cohort study. Setting: The University of Kansas Medical Center, a tertiary-care academic medical center.Participants: Sixty-seven adult patients who underwent durable LVAD implantation between 2017 and 2019.Interventions: All patients underwent open cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass under general anesthesia with pulmonary artery catheter insertion.Measurements and Main Results: Clinical and hemodynamic data were collected before and after surgery. The Michigan right ventricular failure risk score and the European Registry for Patients with Mechanical Circulatory Support score were calculated for each patient. The primary outcome was right ventricular failure, defined as a composite of right ventricular mechanical circulatory support, inhaled pulmonary vasodilator therapy for 48 hours or greater, or inotrope use for 14 days or greater or at discharge. Thirty percent of this cohort (n = 20) met the primary out -come. Preoperative transpulmonary gradient (odds ratio [OR] 1.15, 95% CI 1.02-1.28), cardiac index (OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.71-0.98), and postoperative PAPi (OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.75-0.97) were the only hemodynamic variables associated with the primary outcome. The addition of postoperative PAPi was associated with improvement in the predictive model performance of the Michigan score (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve 0.73 v 0.56, p = 0.03). An optimal cutoff point for postoperative PAPi of 1.56 was found.Conclusions: The inclusion of postoperative PAPi offers more robust predictive power for right ventricular failure in patients undergoing durable LVAD implantation, compared with the use of existing risk scores alone.(c) 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.