Open AccessLeft Ventricular Assist Device Decommissioning Compared with Explantation for Ventricular Recovery: A Systematic Review
Author(s) -
Jae Hwan Choi,
Matthew P. Weber,
Dylan P. Horan,
Jessica G.Y. Luc,
Kevin Phan,
Sinal Patel,
Syed-Saif Abbas Rizvi,
Elizabeth J. Maynes,
Gordon R. Reeves,
John W. Entwistle,
Rohinton J. Morris,
H. Todd Massey,
Vakhtang Tchantchaleishvili
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
asaio journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.961
H-Index - 66
eISSN - 1538-943X
pISSN - 1058-2916
DOI - 10.1097/mat.0000000000000926
Subject(s) - nuclear decommissioning , medicine , ventricular assist device , surgery , hazard ratio , inclusion and exclusion criteria , incidence (geometry) , heart failure , cardiology , confidence interval , engineering , waste management , physics , alternative medicine , optics , pathology
Left ventricular assist device (LVAD) withdrawal with ventricular recovery represents the optimal outcome for patients previously implanted with an LVAD. The aim of this systematic review was to examine the patient outcomes of device withdrawal via minimally invasive pump decommissioning as compared with reoperation for pump explantation. An electronic search was performed to identify all studies in the English literature assessing LVAD withdrawal. All identified articles were systematically assessed for inclusion and exclusion criteria. Overall, 44 studies (85 patients) were included in the analysis, of whom 20% underwent decommissioning and 80% underwent explantation. The most commonly used LVAD types included the HeartMate II (decommissioning 23.5% vs. explantation 60.3%; p = 0.01) and HeartWare HVAD (decommissioning 76.5% vs. explantation 17.6%; p < 0.001). At median follow-up of 389 days, there were no significant differences in the incidence of cerebrovascular accidents (p = 0.88), infection (p = 0.75), and survival (p = 0.20). However, there was a trend toward a higher recurrence of heart failure in patients who underwent decommissioning as compared with explantation (decommissioning 15.4% vs. explantation 8.2%, cumulative hazard; p = 0.06). Decommissioning appears to be a feasible alternative to LVAD explantation in terms of overall patient outcomes.