Key result
MicroRNA expression patterns changed after LVAD support, but the expression patterns did not significantly differ between pulsatile and continuous flow devices, implying that device-specific clinical outcomes do not relate to differences in miR expression levels.
Why the study?
Does continuous flow LVAD support alter myocardial microRNA expression differently compared to pulsatile flow LVAD support in patients with end-stage heart failure?
Observational (n=62)
No
Does continuous flow LVAD support alter myocardial microRNA expression differently compared to pulsatile flow LVAD support in patients with end-stage heart failure?
MicroRNA expression patterns change significantly after LVAD support, but these changes do not significantly differ between continuous and pulsatile flow devices, suggesting similar molecular mechanisms of reverse remodeling.
Challenges miR expression as driver of device-specific LVAD outcomes; leaves open alternative mechanisms for prospective study.
AIM: Pulsatile flow left ventricular assist devices (pf-LVADs) are being replaced by continuous flow LVADs (cf-LVADs) in patients with end-stage heart failure (HF). MicroRNAs (miRs) play an important role in the onset and progression of HF. Our aim was to analyze cardiac miR expression patterns associated with each type of device, to analyze differences in the regulation of the induced cardiac changes. METHODS AND RESULTS: Twenty-six miRs were selected (based on micro-array data and literature studies) and validated in myocardial tissue before and after pf- (n = 17) and cf-LVAD (n = 17) support. Of these, 5 miRs displayed a similar expression pattern among the devices (miR-129*, miR-146a, miR-155, miR-221, miR-222), whereas others only changed significantly during pf-LVAD (miR-let-7i, miR-21, miR-378, miR-378*) or cf-LVAD support (miR-137). In addition, 4 miRs were investigated in plasma of cf-LVAD supported patients (n = 18) and healthy controls (n = 10). Circulating miR-21 decreased at 1, 3, and 6 months after LVAD implantation. MiR-146a, miR-221 and miR-222 showed a fluctuating time pattern post-LVAD. CONCLUSION: Our data show a different miR expression pattern after LVAD support, suggesting that differentially expressed miRs are partially responsible for the cardiac morphological and functional changes observed after support. However, the miR expression patterns do not seem to significantly differ between pf- and cf-LVAD implying that most cardiac changes or clinical outcomes specific to each device do not relate to differences in miR expression levels.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lok et al. (2015) conducted an observational in End-stage heart failure (non-ischemic dilated cardiomyopathy) (n=62). Continuous flow LVAD (cf-LVAD) vs. Pulsatile flow LVAD (pf-LVAD) was evaluated on Change in myocardial microRNA expression pre- and post-LVAD support. MicroRNA expression patterns changed after LVAD support, but the expression patterns did not significantly differ between pulsatile and continuous flow devices, implying that device-specific clinical outcomes do not relate to differences in miR expression levels.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: