Retrospective study shows HeartMate 3 provides comparable survival with zero pump thrombosis versus HVAD in pediatric patients, suggesting it is a viable long-term support option.
Background: The withdrawal of the HeartWare HVAD required pediatric mechanical circulatory support programs to transition to alternative durable intracorporeal devices. We evaluated our single-center experience across the HVAD and HeartMate 3 (HM3) eras. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed all pediatric patients who underwent primary durable intracorporeal LVAD implantation between January 2012 and December 2024. Clinical characteristics, perioperative outcomes, survival on support, bridge-to-transplantation, and device-related adverse events were compared. Results: Thirty-four patients were included: 22 received HVAD and 12 received HM3. Baseline characteristics were generally comparable. Cardiopulmonary bypass time was significantly longer in the HM3 group ( p < 0.001). Median support duration was longer with HVAD (1002 vs 838 days; p = 0.304). Survival on LVAD support did not differ between groups (log-rank p = 0.375). Pump thrombosis (40.9% vs 0%; p = 0.013) and ischemic stroke (27.3% vs 0%; p = 0.069) occurred only in HVAD recipients, whereas infectious complications were comparable between groups. Conclusions: HM3 appears to be a feasible intracorporeal long-term support option for selected pediatric patients in the post-HVAD era. Longer-term multicenter pediatric studies are needed to define durability, late complications, and optimal patient selection.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Karaca et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: