Premium
Readmissions Following Implantation of a Continuous‐Flow Left Ventricular Assist Device
Author(s) -
Da Silva Matthew,
MacIver Jane,
Rodger Marnie,
Jaffer Munira,
Raju Sneha,
Billia Filio,
Rao Vivek
Publication year - 2016
Publication title -
journal of cardiac surgery
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.428
H-Index - 58
eISSN - 1540-8191
pISSN - 0886-0440
DOI - 10.1111/jocs.12744
Subject(s) - medicine , ventricular assist device , continuous flow , destination therapy , hospital readmission , retrospective cohort study , surgery , emergency medicine , heart failure , physics , mechanics
Objective The objective of this study is to review and analyze readmission data for patients who received a continuous flow left ventricular assist device (LVAD). Methods A retrospective review of 88 patients implanted with a continuous‐flow LVAD between June 2006 and June 2014 was performed. Reason for readmission, frequency, length of stay, and procedures performed during each readmission were recorded. All patients were followed in our LVAD clinic and all readmissions were reported to our program. Results Sixty‐seven patients (76%) were discharged following their hospitalization for LVAD implant. In these patients, indication for LVAD support consisted of bridge to transplant (78%) and destination therapy (22%). Total device support time was 30,482 days, with an average support time of 455 ± 376 days. Forty‐two patients (63%) were readmitted at least once, with an average length of readmission stay of nine days (median = 6). There were 129 readmissions totaling 1264 hospital days. The main reason for readmission was infection (17%). Despite this relatively high readmission rate, patients spent 86% of their time outside the hospital. Conclusion Although common, LVAD readmissions can be appropriately managed with patients spending the majority of their support time at home. doi: 10.1111/jocs.12744 (J Card Surg 2016;31:361–364)