Aim: Temporary right ventricular assist device (t-RVAD) is an option for those patients in right ventricular failure (RVF) after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) resistant to ionotropic therapy. There are two options to placing a t-RVAD: an open, central technique or a percutaneous placement with Protek Duo® cannula. Methods: We compare these two t-RVAD devices that treat RVF after LVAD placement. Between 2013–2019, 22 patients were identified needing t-RVAD support after LVAD placement. Fourteen patients had open/central while 8 patients had percutaneous right ventricular assist device (RVAD) support. Results: There was no difference in length of ICU stay (49 ± 32 days Protek Duo® vs. 45 ± 22 days “open”; P = 0.73); hospital length of stay (57 ± 39 days vs. 55 ± 28 days; P = 0.088); discharge from ICU and hospital (62.1% Protek Duo® vs. 57% for “open”; P = 0.9 for both); or the one-year survival between the two groups (62% Protek Duo® vs. 50% “open”; P = 0.67). The Protek Duo® group had less total time on the ventilator (15 ± 9 days vs. 27 ± 17 days; P = 0.044) and required less amount of blood products (17 ± 8.9 units RBC and 2.0 ± 1.91 units FFP vs. 31 ± 20.5 units RBC and 11.5 ± 10 units FFP; P = 0.046 and P = 0.005). Conclusions: Percutaneous t-RVAD support is a viable option for patients whom undergo LVAD placement and require right ventricular mechanical support.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Prasad et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: