|
|
||||||||
Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2004;25:958-963
© 2004 Elsevier Science NL
a University of Louisville, Louisville, KY, USA
b California Pacific Medical Center, San Francisco, CA, USA
c University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
d St Lukes Medical Center, Milwaukee, WI, USA
e New York Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY, USA
f Sacred Heart Medical Center, Spokane, WA, USA
g Thoratec Corporation, Pleasanton, CA, USA
h St Lukes Episcopal Hospital, Houston, TX, USA
Received 22 October 2003; received in revised form 4 March 2004; accepted 5 March 2004.
* Corresponding author. Address: Jewish Hospital Heart and Lung Institute, 217 East Chestnut Street, Louisville, KY 40202, USA. Tel.: +1-502-561-2180; fax: +1-502-584-2819
e-mail: rdowling{at}ucsamd.com
| Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Key Words: Left ventricular assist device Assisted circulation
| 1. Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The HeartMate vented electric (VE) left ventricular assist system (LVAS) (Thoratec Corp., Pleasanton, CA) is widely used for bridge to transplantation and recently became the first LVAD to receive Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval for permanent use in patients with end-stage heart failure ineligible for heart transplantation. The FDA approval was primarily based on the Randomized Evaluation of Mechanical Assistance for the Treatment of Congestive Heart Failure (REMATCH) trial that compared the HeartMate VE LVAS and optimal medical therapy for patients with end-stage heart failure who were ineligible for heart transplantation. The trial demonstrated that LVAD therapy provided a clear survival benefit and improved quality of life [4].
As we move into the era of LVADs as a destination therapy, improvements in device reliability and durability are needed. Device malfunctions can result in significant morbidity and mortality for patients requiring LVAD therapy [5]. The probability of HeartMate VE LVAS device failure in the REMATCH trial was 35% at 24 months, and device replacement was required in 10 of 68 (14.7%) device patients [4].
The design of the HeartMate VE LVAS dates back to 1975 and clinical trials were initiated in 1991 after more than 16 years of development and more than 95 pre-clinical implants [6,7]. Since that time, the HeartMate VE LVAS has supported more than 2300 patients. This extensive clinical experience has led to numerous design changes and product improvements over the years [8]. Recently, the HeartMate VE LVAS underwent a number of design improvements and was renamed the HeartMate XVE LVAS. The modifications were designed to improve pump reliability and durability, ease of use, patient comfort and to decrease device-related complications and nuisance alarms. The purpose of this study is to determine if design enhancements have improved device reliability and durability.
| 2. Materials and methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
2.3. Design modifications
A series of improvements were made to the current HeartMate XVE LVAS (Fig. 2)
compared to the previous HeartMate VE LVAS model. To date, the most significant enhancements incorporated into the HeartMate XVE system to improve reliability and durability was made to the percutaneous lead, LVAS pump, outflow conduit, and system controller (Table 1).
|
|
The HeartMate XVE also includes some of the modifications made to a later version of the HeartMate VE, most notably, the addition of an outflow graft bend relief and locking screw rings. The bend relief is a polyester graft that is positioned over the outflow graft to prevent graft kinking and abrasion of the outflow graft. Outflow graft kinking and abrasion is believed to cause graft erosion and blood loss as well as high pump chamber pressure, which could contribute to increase the stress on the inflow valve. Another significant improvement was the locking screw rings, a ratchet-type locking mechanism that eliminates the use of conventional sutures to secure the grafts and valves, as well as conduits to the inflow and outflow body of the pump. The screw rings were designed to reduce the possibility of blood loss due to accidental dislodgement from loosening of screw rings with sutures.
High diaphragm stresses, caused by diaphragm buckling, can result in diaphragm fracture. This has been addressed by two means. First, by repositioning the diaphragm support structure axially 0.150 in. to bring the diaphragm flange closer to the piston at the end of each stroke. In this position, buckling should be eliminated which reduces the likelihood of diaphragm fractures. A second modification is the incorporation of modified software for the automatic mode of operation. The software will in essence decrease the amount of time that the pump chamber pressure is elevated and significantly reduce the pump chamber pressure, which should decrease the amount of stress on the diaphragm, motor bearings and inflow valve.
Additional sutures to the valve commissure were added to strengthen the attachment to the graft material. Bench testing has shown that the combination of additional stitches behind the commissure and one across the commissure has doubled the life expectancy of the valves in high-speed cyclic testing compared to the old design (personal communication, V. Poirier, Thoratec Corp.).
The designed benefits of the HeartMate XVE LVAS improvements primarily reduce the risk of device-related adverse events and improve device durability. For patients, improvement in device durability, a reduction in device-related adverse events, would also improve patient's Quality of Life [4].
The serious device malfunctions have been addressed as a result of clinical manifestation of the various failure modes associated with the different LVAD components. In each of the failure types, the manufacturer was able to simulate in the in vitro setting, similar failure modes experienced in the clinical setting. Table 2 describes the type of in vitro analysis conducted to confirm the failure type.
|
| 3. Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
A total of 134 serious mechanical failures was reported within the first year of LVAS support (Table 3). Inflow valve dysfunction was the most common mechanical failure and occurred in 78/1457 (5.3%) VE devices and 10/407 (2.4%) XVE devices (P=0.853). There were 28 percutaneous lead breaks, 4 cases of outflow graft erosion, 2 pump disconnects and 2 diaphragm fractures in the VE device. None of these complications occurred in the XVE group. Bearing failures occurred in nine VE pumps at a mean duration of 294 days (range 210363 days) and one XVE pump at 249 days.
|
|
There were no diaphragm fractures in 411 pumps implanted after repositioning the diaphragm support structure axially compared to a 0.4% incidence prior to the modification. One case of outflow graft erosion was reported after introducing the bend relief and in this particular case there was kinking beyond the bend relief due to an outflow graft that was not trimmed adequately. There were no reported cases of pump disconnects after introducing the locking screw rings and no pump lead breakage associated with the new percutaneous lead. The incidence of inflow valve incompetence is 5% after introduction of the outflow graft bend relief. However, the influence of the revised software and additional valve sutures on the incidence of inflow valve incompetence has not been analyzed (Table 4).
|
| 4. Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Device improvements are ongoing and the current potential of the XVE LVAS has not been realized. Later this year, the XVE will again be modified by the addition of a new reinforced inflow valve assembly that has demonstrated encouraging in vitro result (Fig. 4) . High pressure in the pump chamber would tend to displace the current valve toward the ventricle and cause distortion of the graft. In addition, sutures that attach the vascular graft to the metal valve cage would break due to the pressure and allow the valve to oscillate in the cage. This oscillation could produce abrasion as well as distortion, leading to valve incompetence. Any extreme bending of the valve assembly would also lead to valve distortion. Distortion of the tissue valve is also possible with the current inflow valve conduit if any twisting action is used to insert the inflow tube into the left ventricle.
|
All mechanical systems are subject to wear. The HeartMate XVE has four bearings in the system, two motor bearings and two driver bearings. There was one reported bearing failure in the current XVE LVAS version and testing and evaluation is underway to improve bearing durability.
| 5. Conclusion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| Footnotes |
|---|
1 V.L. Poirier is an employee of Thoratec Corporation. ![]()
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
M. J. Russo, K. N. Hong, R. R. Davies, J. M. Chen, R. A. Sorabella, D. D. Ascheim, M. R. Williams, A. C. Gelijns, A. S. Stewart, M. Argenziano, et al. Posttransplant survival is not diminished in heart transplant recipients bridged with implantable left ventricular assist devices. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., December 1, 2009; 138(6): 1425 - 1432.e3. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
F. D. Pagani, L. W. Miller, S. D. Russell, K. D. Aaronson, R. John, A. J. Boyle, J. V. Conte, R. C. Bogaev, T. E. MacGillivray, Y. Naka, et al. Extended mechanical circulatory support with a continuous-flow rotary left ventricular assist device. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., July 21, 2009; 54(4): 312 - 321. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. Loisance Mechanical Circulatory Support: a Clinical Reality Asian Cardiovasc Thorac Ann, October 1, 2008; 16(5): 419 - 431. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. W. Long, A. H. Healy, B. Y. Rasmusson, C. G. Cowley, K. E. Nelson, A. G. Kfoury, S. E. Clayson, B. B. Reid, S. A. Moore, D. U. Blank, et al. Improving outcomes with long-term "destination" therapy using left ventricular assist devices. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., June 1, 2008; 135(6): 1353 - 1361. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
I. D. Gregoric, B. A. Bruckner, L. Jacob, B. Kar, W. E. Cohn, S. La Francesca, and O.H. Frazier Clinical Experience With Sternotomy Versus Subcostal Approach for Exchange of the HeartMate XVE to the HeartMate II Ventricular Assist Device Ann. Thorac. Surg., May 1, 2008; 85(5): 1646 - 1649. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. Esmore, P. Spratt, R. Larbalestier, S. Tsui, A. Fiane, P. Ruygrok, D. Meyers, and J. Woodard VentrAssistTM left ventricular assist device: clinical trial results and Clinical Development Plan update Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg., November 1, 2007; 32(5): 735 - 744. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. Chumnanvej, M. J. Wood, T. E. MacGillivray, and M. F. V. Melo Perioperative Echocardiographic Examination for Ventricular Assist Device Implantation Anesth. Analg., September 1, 2007; 105(3): 583 - 601. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. Lietz, J. W. Long, A. G. Kfoury, M. S. Slaughter, M. A. Silver, C. A. Milano, J. G. Rogers, Y. Naka, D. Mancini, and L. W. Miller Outcomes of Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation as Destination Therapy in the Post-REMATCH Era: Implications for Patient Selection Circulation, July 31, 2007; 116(5): 497 - 505. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
F. D. Pagani, J. W. Long, W. P. Dembitsky, L. D. Joyce, and L. W. Miller Improved Mechanical Reliability of the HeartMate XVE Left Ventricular Assist System. Ann. Thorac. Surg., October 1, 2006; 82(4): 1413 - 1418. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. Schenk, S. Weber, W. A. Smith, and K. Fukamachi MagScrew Total Artificial Heart Ann. Thorac. Surg., June 1, 2006; 81(6): 2338 - 2339. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| ANN THORAC SURG | ASIAN CARDIOVASC THORAC ANN | EUR J CARDIOTHORAC SURG |
| J THORAC CARDIOVASC SURG | ICVTS | ALL CTSNet JOURNALS |