Is Resternotomy a Risk for Continuous-Flow Left Ventricular Assist Device Outcomes?

被引:9
|
作者
Tsiouris, Athanasios [1 ]
Brewer, Robert J. [1 ]
Borgi, Jamil [1 ]
Hodari, Arielle [1 ]
Nemeh, Hassan W. [1 ]
Cogan, Chad M. [1 ]
Paone, Gaetano [1 ]
Morgan, Jeffrey A. [1 ]
机构
[1] Henry Ford Hosp, Inst Heart & Vasc, Div Cardiothorac Surg, Dept Gen Surg, Detroit, MI 48202 USA
关键词
left ventricular assist device (LVAD); reoperative sternotomy; outcomes; CARDIAC-SURGERY; STERNAL REENTRY; SCREENING SCALE; STILL; REOPERATION;
D O I
10.1111/jocs.12048
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background: The number of patients undergoing resternotomy continues to rise. Although catastrophic hemorrhage remains a dreaded complication, most published data suggest that sternal reentrance is safe, with negligible postoperative morbidity and mortality. A significant proportion of left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantations are reoperative cardiac procedures. The aim of our study was to compare outcomes between first time sternotomy and resternotomy patients receiving continuous-flow LVADs, as a bridge to transplantation or destination therapy. Methods and materials: From March 2006 through February 2012, 100 patients underwent implantation of a HeartMate II or HeartWare LVAD at our institution. Patients were stratified into two groups, primary sternotomy and resternotomy. Variables were compared using two-sided t-tests, chi-square tests, Cox proportional hazards models, and log-rank tests to determine whether there was a difference between the two groups and if resternotomy was a significant independent predictor of outcome. Results: We identified 29 patients (29%) who had resternotomy and 71 patients (71%) who had first time sternotomy. The resternotomy group was significantly older (56 years vs. 51 years, p?=?0.05), was more likely to have ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM) (69% vs. 30%, p?<?0.001), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (31% vs. 14%, p?=?0.05) and had longer cardiopulmonary bypass times (135?min vs. 100?min, p?=?0.011). Survival rates at 30 days (93.1% vs. 95.8%, p?=?0.564), 180 days (82.8% vs. 93%, p?=?0.131), and 360 days (82.8% vs. 88.7%, p?=?0.398) were similar for the resternotomy and primary sternotomy groups, respectively. Postoperative complications were also comparable, except for re-exploration for bleeding which was higher for the resternotomy group (17.2% vs. 4.2%, p?=?0.029), although blood transfusion requirements were not significantly different (1.4 units vs. 1.2 units, p?=?0.815). Left and right heart catheterization measurements and echocardiographic (ECHO) findings after 1 and 6 months of LVAD therapy were similar between the two groups. Conclusions: Survival at 30, 180, and 360 days after LVAD implantation is similar between the resternotomy and primary sternotomy group. No major differences in complications or hemodynamic measurements were observed. Although a limited observational study, our findings agree with previously published resternotomy outcomes.
引用
收藏
页码:82 / 87
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Continuous-flow left ventricular assist device exchange: Clinical outcomes
    Ota, Takeyoshi
    Yerebakan, Halit
    Akashi, Hirokazu
    Takayama, Hiroo
    Uriel, Nir
    Colombo, Paolo C.
    Jorde, Urich P.
    Naka, Yoshifumi
    JOURNAL OF HEART AND LUNG TRANSPLANTATION, 2014, 33 (01): : 65 - 70
  • [2] Psychosocial Risk and Its Association With Outcomes in Continuous-Flow Left Ventricular Assist Device Patients
    DeFilippis, Ersilia M.
    Breathett, Khadijah
    Donald, Elena M.
    Nakagawa, Shunichi
    Takeda, Koji
    Takayama, Hiroo
    Truby, Lauren K.
    Sayer, Gabriel
    Colombo, Paolo C.
    Yuzefpolskaya, Melana
    Uriel, Nir
    Farr, Maryjane A.
    Topkara, Veli K.
    CIRCULATION-HEART FAILURE, 2020, 13 (09) : E006910
  • [3] Continuous-Flow Left Ventricular Assist Device REPLY
    Slaughter, Mark S.
    Rogers, Joseph G.
    NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2010, 362 (12): : 1149 - 1149
  • [4] The Effect of Continuous-Flow Left Ventricular Assist Device Duration on Postoperative Outcomes
    Chauhan, Dhaval
    Okoh, Alexis K.
    Haik, Nicky
    Kang, Nathan
    Choi, Michael
    Baran, David
    Zucker, Mark
    Camacho, Magarita
    Russo, Mark J.
    ANNALS OF THORACIC SURGERY, 2017, 104 (06): : 1933 - 1938
  • [5] Evaluation of Risk Indices in Continuous-Flow Left Ventricular Assist Device Patients
    Schaffer, Justin M.
    Allen, Jeremiah G.
    Weiss, Eric S.
    Patel, Nishant D.
    Russell, Stuart D.
    Shah, Ashish S.
    Conte, John V.
    ANNALS OF THORACIC SURGERY, 2009, 88 (06): : 1889 - 1896
  • [6] Ventricular Arrhythmias in Patients With a Continuous-Flow Left Ventricular Assist Device
    Yap, Sing-Chien
    Ramjankhan, Faiz
    de Jonge, Rahat Muslem Nicolaas
    Kirkels, Hans J.
    Akin, Sakir
    Manintveld, Olivier C.
    Birim, Ozcan
    Szili-Torok, Tamas
    Caliskan, Kadir
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY, 2016, 68 (03) : 323 - 325
  • [7] Physiology of Continuous-flow Left Ventricular Assist Device Therapy
    Rosenbaum, Andrew N.
    Antaki, James F.
    Behfar, Atta
    Villavicencio, Mauricio A.
    Stulak, John
    Kushwaha, Sudhir S.
    COMPREHENSIVE PHYSIOLOGY, 2022, 12 (01) : 2731 - 2767
  • [8] Continuous-Flow Left Ventricular Assist Device and the Right Ventricle
    Puhlman, Mark
    AACN ADVANCED CRITICAL CARE, 2012, 23 (01) : 86 - 90
  • [9] Surgical approach to continuous-flow left ventricular assist device explantation: A comparison of outcomes
    Baldwin, Andrew C. W.
    Sandoval, Elena
    Letsou, George V.
    Mallidi, Hari R.
    Cohn, William E.
    Frazier, O. H.
    JOURNAL OF THORACIC AND CARDIOVASCULAR SURGERY, 2016, 151 (01): : 192 - 198
  • [10] Stroke After Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation: Outcomes in the Continuous-Flow Era
    Harvey, Laura
    Holley, Christopher
    Roy, Samit S.
    Eckman, Peter
    Cogswell, Rebecca
    Liao, Kenneth
    John, Ranjit
    ANNALS OF THORACIC SURGERY, 2015, 100 (02): : 535 - 541