Key result
Exchange of the modular driveline cable in HeartMate 3 patients resulted in no complications (0/31 cases), avoiding the risky repairs and surgical VAD exchanges required in HeartMate II patients.
Why the study?
Repairing driveline electrical fibers on a running VAD pump is hazardous and technically demanding, leading to the development of a modular driveline cord in the HeartMate 3 to simplify exchanges.
Does modular driveline cable exchange in HeartMate 3 patients prevent complications compared to conventional driveline repair in HeartMate II patients?
Cohort (n=302)
Does modular driveline cable exchange in HeartMate 3 patients prevent complications compared to conventional driveline repair in HeartMate II patients?
The modular driveline feature of the HeartMate 3 LVAD allows for safe and feasible cable exchange, avoiding the risky repairs and surgical device exchanges associated with conventional driveline damage in HeartMate II patients.
Modular DL exchange may ease HM3 repairs; leaves open durability, infection risk, and need for prospective data.
BACKGROUND: Driveline (DL) damages are a common difficulty among ventricular assist devices (VAD). Repairing the electrical fibers inside the DL on a running pump is hazardous and requires technical expertise, which is not easily available on site. A new feature of the HeartMate3 (Abbott, U.S.A.) LVAD is a modular driveline that allows an easy exchange of the DL cord. In this report we analyze our experiences with this feature. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of 302 patients who underwent either HeartMate II or HeartMate 3 implantation between February 2004 and September 2021. Patients were screened for driveline faults and need for exchange or repair of driveline or VAD exchange. Documented were baseline characteristics, reasons for DL or VAD exchange, and complications. Follow-up was three months after the procedure. RESULTS: We present a cohort of 302 patients who underwent either HMII (n = 107;35.4%) or HM 3 (n = 195; 64.5%) implantation. Out of those, 40 patients (40/302; 13.2%) required driveline repair (DLRe) or exchange (DLEx). Out of 107 HMII patients, 9 showed severe DL damages (9/107; 8.4%). Six patients (6/9; 66.6%) underwent DLRe, two patients (2/6; 33.3%) required VAD exchange after DLRe, one patient (1/2;50%) experienced emergency VAD exchange after pump stop. The DLRe procedure in the other four patients (4/6; 66.6%) was successful. Due to damage to the internal driveline two patients (2/9; 22.2%) underwent emergency device exchange and one patient (1/9;11.1%) was listed for transplantation. 31 out 195 HM3 patients underwent exchange of the modular DL. In none of the cases, damages of the internal fibers were the reasons for the exchange. In 100% of the cases, damages of the external coating were the reason for DL exchange. In none of the cases, complications occurred after the exchange procedure. CONCLUSIONS: Driveline damages are a habitual, recurrent complication in VAD patients. The exchange of the modular driveline cable of the HM3 is feasible and safe compared to the conventional DL repair in HMII patients. Risky repair attempts and surgical LVAD exchange due to major damages of the electrical fibers can be avoided successfully by the new feature of HM3 driveline.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Merzah et al. (2022) conducted a cohort in Ventricular assist device (VAD) implantation (n=302). Modular driveline exchange (HeartMate 3) vs. Conventional driveline repair (HeartMate II) was evaluated on Complications after driveline exchange or repair. Exchange of the modular driveline cable in HeartMate 3 patients resulted in no complications (0/31 cases), avoiding the risky repairs and surgical VAD exchanges required in HeartMate II patients.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: