BACKGROUND: Ventricular arrhythmias (VAs) are observed in 25%-50% of continuous-flow left ventricular assist device (CF-LVAD) recipients, but their role on mortality is debated. METHODS: Sixty-nine consecutive patients with a CF-LVAD were retrospectively analyzed. Study endpoints were death and occurrence of first episode of VAs post CF-LVAD implantation. Early VAs were defined as VAs in the first month after CF-LVAD implantation. RESULTS: During a median follow-up of 29.0 months, 19 patients (27.5%) died and 18 patients (26.1%) experienced VAs. Three patients experienced early VAs, and one of them died. Patients with cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT-D) showed a trend toward more VAs (p = 0.076), compared to patients without CRT-D; no significant difference in mortality was found between patients with and without CRT-D (p = 0.63). Patients with biventricular (BiV) pacing >/=98% experienced more frequently VAs (p = 0.046), with no difference in mortality (p = 0.56), compared to patients experiencing BiV pacing <98%. There was no difference in mortality among patients with or without VAs after CF-LVAD [5 patients (27.8%) vs. 14 patients (27.5%), p = 0.18)], and patients with or without previous history of VAs (p = 0.95). Also, there was no difference in mortality among patients with a different timing of implant of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD), before and after CF-LVAD (p = 0.11). CONCLUSIONS: VAs in CF-LVAD are a common clinical problem, but they do not impact mortality. Timing of ICD implantation does not have a significant impact on patients' survival. Patients with BiV pacing >/=98% experienced more frequently VAs.

Clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with ventricular arrhythmias after continuous-flow left ventricular assist device implant / Gulletta, S.; Scandroglio, A. M.; Pannone, L.; Falasconi, G.; Melisurgo, G.; Ajello, S.; D'Angelo, G.; Gigli, L.; Lipartiti, F.; Agricola, E.; Lapenna, E.; Castiglioni, A.; De Bonis, M.; Landoni, G.; Bella, P. D.; Zangrillo, A.; Vergara, P. - In: ARTIFICIAL ORGANS. - ISSN 0160-564X. - 46:(2022), pp. 1608-1615. [10.1111/aor.14234]

Clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with ventricular arrhythmias after continuous-flow left ventricular assist device implant

VERGARA P
2022

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Ventricular arrhythmias (VAs) are observed in 25%-50% of continuous-flow left ventricular assist device (CF-LVAD) recipients, but their role on mortality is debated. METHODS: Sixty-nine consecutive patients with a CF-LVAD were retrospectively analyzed. Study endpoints were death and occurrence of first episode of VAs post CF-LVAD implantation. Early VAs were defined as VAs in the first month after CF-LVAD implantation. RESULTS: During a median follow-up of 29.0 months, 19 patients (27.5%) died and 18 patients (26.1%) experienced VAs. Three patients experienced early VAs, and one of them died. Patients with cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT-D) showed a trend toward more VAs (p = 0.076), compared to patients without CRT-D; no significant difference in mortality was found between patients with and without CRT-D (p = 0.63). Patients with biventricular (BiV) pacing >/=98% experienced more frequently VAs (p = 0.046), with no difference in mortality (p = 0.56), compared to patients experiencing BiV pacing <98%. There was no difference in mortality among patients with or without VAs after CF-LVAD [5 patients (27.8%) vs. 14 patients (27.5%), p = 0.18)], and patients with or without previous history of VAs (p = 0.95). Also, there was no difference in mortality among patients with a different timing of implant of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD), before and after CF-LVAD (p = 0.11). CONCLUSIONS: VAs in CF-LVAD are a common clinical problem, but they do not impact mortality. Timing of ICD implantation does not have a significant impact on patients' survival. Patients with BiV pacing >/=98% experienced more frequently VAs.
2022
Clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with ventricular arrhythmias after continuous-flow left ventricular assist device implant / Gulletta, S.; Scandroglio, A. M.; Pannone, L.; Falasconi, G.; Melisurgo, G.; Ajello, S.; D'Angelo, G.; Gigli, L.; Lipartiti, F.; Agricola, E.; Lapenna, E.; Castiglioni, A.; De Bonis, M.; Landoni, G.; Bella, P. D.; Zangrillo, A.; Vergara, P. - In: ARTIFICIAL ORGANS. - ISSN 0160-564X. - 46:(2022), pp. 1608-1615. [10.1111/aor.14234]
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
81 Gulletta VAD - Artificial Organs 2022.pdf

non disponibili

Licenza: Non specificato
Dimensione 874.03 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
874.03 kB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11588/997936
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 12
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 8
social impact