7
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Device Therapy and Arrhythmia Management in Left Ventricular Assist Device Recipients: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association

      , , , , , , , , , , On behalf of the American Heart Association Electrocardiography and Arrhythmias Committee; Heart Failure and Transplantation Committee of the Council on Clinical Cardiology; and Council on Cardiovascular and Stroke Nursing
      Circulation
      Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          <p class="first" id="d4688406e97">Left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) are an increasingly used strategy for the management of patients with advanced heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. Although these devices effectively improve survival, atrial and ventricular arrhythmias are common, predispose these patients to additional risk, and complicate patient management. However, there is no consensus on best practices for the medical management of these arrhythmias or on the optimal timing for procedural interventions in patients with refractory arrhythmias. Although the vast majority of these patients have preexisting cardiovascular implantable electronic devices or cardiac resynchronization therapy, given the natural history of heart failure, it is common practice to maintain cardiovascular implantable electronic device detection and therapies after LVAD implantation. Available data, however, are conflicting on the efficacy of and optimal device programming after LVAD implantation. Therefore, the primary objective of this scientific statement is to review the available evidence and to provide guidance on the management of atrial and ventricular arrhythmias in this unique patient population, as well as procedural interventions and cardiovascular implantable electronic device and cardiac resynchronization therapy programming strategies, on the basis of a comprehensive literature review by electrophysiologists, heart failure cardiologists, cardiac surgeons, and cardiovascular nurse specialists with expertise in managing these patients. The structure and design of commercially available LVADs are briefly reviewed, as well as clinical indications for device implantation. The relevant physiological effects of long-term exposure to continuous-flow circulatory support are highlighted, as well as the mechanisms and clinical significance of arrhythmias in the setting of LVAD support. </p>

          Related collections

          Most cited references142

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          2017 HRS expert consensus statement on cardiovascular implantable electronic device lead management and extraction

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            The 2013 International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation Guidelines for mechanical circulatory support: executive summary.

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Seventh INTERMACS annual report: 15,000 patients and counting.

              The seventh annual report of the Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support (INTERMACS) summarizes the first 9 years of patient enrollment. The Registry includes >15,000 patients from 158 participating hospitals. Trends in device strategy, patient profile at implant and survival are presented. Risk factors for mortality with continuous-flow pumps are updated, and the major causes/modes of death are presented. The adverse event burden is compared between eras, and health-related quality of life is reviewed. A detailed analysis of outcomes after mechanical circulatory support for ambulatory heart failure is presented. Recent summary data from PediMACS and MedaMACS is included. With the current continuous-flow devices, survival at 1 and 2 years is 80% and 70%, respectively.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Circulation
                Circulation
                Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
                0009-7322
                1524-4539
                April 04 2019
                April 04 2019
                Article
                10.1161/CIR.0000000000000673
                30943783
                97dcb12c-11ed-4891-8de3-d2934b892054
                © 2019
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article