» Articles » PMID: 32780341

The Role of Long-term Mechanical Circulatory Support in Patients with Advanced Heart Failure

Overview
Journal Neth Heart J
Date 2020 Aug 12
PMID 32780341
Citations 3
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

In patients with end-stage heart failure, advanced therapies such as heart transplantation and long-term mechanical circulatory support (MCS) with a left ventricular assist device (LVAD) have to be considered. LVADs can be implanted as a bridge to transplantation or as an alternative to heart transplantation: destination therapy. In the Netherlands, long-term LVAD therapy is gaining importance as a result of increased prevalence of heart failure together with a low number of heart transplantations due to shortage of donor hearts. As a result, the difference between bridge to transplantation and destination therapy is becoming more artificial since, at present, most patients initially implanted as bridge to transplantation end up receiving extended LVAD therapy. Following LVAD implantation, survival after 1, 2 and 3 years is 83%, 76% and 70%, respectively. Quality of life improves substantially despite important adverse events such as device-related infection, stroke, major bleeding and right heart failure. Early referral of potential candidates for long-term MCS is of utmost importance and positively influences outcome. In this review, an overview of the indications, contraindications, patient selection, clinical outcome and optimal time of referral for long-term MCS is given.

Citing Articles

Outcomes of Left Ventricular Assist Devices as Destination Therapy: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis.

Khoufi E Life (Basel). 2025; 15(1).

PMID: 39859993 PMC: 11767145. DOI: 10.3390/life15010053.


Hyperpolypharmacy is a predictor of mortality after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation.

Dautzenberg L, Numan L, Knol W, Gianoli M, van der Meer M, Troost-Oppelaar A Am Heart J Plus. 2024; 24:100233.

PMID: 38560633 PMC: 10978416. DOI: 10.1016/j.ahjo.2022.100233.


Left ventricular assist device implantation and clinical outcomes in the Netherlands.

Damman K, Caliskan K, Birim O, Kuijpers M, Otterspoor L, Yazdanbakhsh A Neth Heart J. 2023; 31(5):189-195.

PMID: 36723773 PMC: 10140239. DOI: 10.1007/s12471-023-01760-9.


A Flow Sensor-Based Suction-Index Control Strategy for Rotary Left Ventricular Assist Devices.

Liang L, Qin K, El-Baz A, Roussel T, Sethu P, Giridharan G Sensors (Basel). 2021; 21(20).

PMID: 34696104 PMC: 8541286. DOI: 10.3390/s21206890.

References
1.
Rose E, Gelijns A, Moskowitz A, Heitjan D, Stevenson L, Dembitsky W . Long-term use of a left ventricular assist device for end-stage heart failure. N Engl J Med. 2002; 345(20):1435-43. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa012175. View

2.
Sidhu K, Lam P, Mehra M . Evolving trends in mechanical circulatory support: Clinical development of a fully magnetically levitated durable ventricular assist device. Trends Cardiovasc Med. 2019; 30(4):223-229. DOI: 10.1016/j.tcm.2019.05.013. View

3.
Estep J, Starling R, Horstmanshof D, Milano C, Selzman C, Shah K . Risk Assessment and Comparative Effectiveness of Left Ventricular Assist Device and Medical Management in Ambulatory Heart Failure Patients: Results From the ROADMAP Study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015; 66(16):1747-1761. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2015.07.075. View

4.
Lahpor J, de Jonge N, van Swieten H, Wesenhagen H, Klopping C, Geertman J . Left ventricular assist device as bridge to transplantation in patients with end-stage heart failure: Eight-year experience with the implantable HeartMate LVAS. Neth Heart J. 2015; 10(6):267-271. PMC: 2499769. View

5.
Felix S, Ramjankhan F, Buijsrogge M, Jacob K, Asselbergs F, Oerlemans M . Outcome of mechanical circulatory support at the University Medical Centre Utrecht. Neth Heart J. 2020; 28(4):210-218. PMC: 7113343. DOI: 10.1007/s12471-020-01375-4. View