Using pulsatility responses to breath‐hold maneuvers to predict readmission rates in continuous‐flow left ventricular assist device patients

Author:

Krishnaswamy Rohan Joshua12ORCID,Robson Desiree1,Gunawan Aaron12,Ramanayake Anju12,Barua Sumita123,Jain Pankaj123,Adji Audrey123,Macdonald Peter Simon123,Hayward Christopher Simon123ORCID,Muthiah Kavitha123ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Heart and Lung Transplant Unit St Vincent's Hospital Darlinghurst New South Wales Australia

2. Faculty of Medicine University of New South Wales Sydney New South Wales Australia

3. Victor Chang Cardiac Research Institute Darlinghurst New South Wales Australia

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundDynamic respiratory maneuvers induce heterogenous changes to flow‐pulsatility in continuous‐flow left ventricular assist device patients. We evaluated the association of these pulsatility responses with patient hemodynamics and outcomes.MethodsResponses obtained from HVAD (Medtronic) outpatients during successive weekly clinics were categorized into three ordinal groups according to the percentage reduction in flow‐waveform pulsatility (peak‐trough flow) upon inspiratory‐breath‐hold, (%∆P): (1) minimal change (%∆P ≤ 50), (2) reduced pulsatility (%∆P > 50 but <100), (3) flatline (%∆P = 100). Same‐day echocardiography and right‐heart‐catheterization were performed. Readmissions were compared between patients with ≥1 flatline response (F‐group) and those without (NF‐group).ResultsOverall, 712 responses were obtained from 55 patients (82% male, age 56.4 ± 11.5). When compared to minimal change, reduced pulsatility and flatline responses were associated with lower central venous pressure (14.2 vs. 11.4 vs. 9.0 mm Hg, p = 0.08) and pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (19.8 vs. 14.3 vs. 13.0 mm Hg, p = 0.03), lower rates of ≥moderate mitral regurgitation (48% vs. 13% vs. 10%, p = 0.01), lower rates of ≥moderate right ventricular impairment (62% vs. 25% vs. 27%, p = 0.03), and increased rates of aortic valve opening (32% vs. 50% vs. 75%, p = 0.03). The F‐group (n = 28) experienced numerically lower all‐cause readmissions (1.51 vs. 2.79 events‐per‐patient‐year [EPPY], hazard‐ratio [HR] = 0.67, p = 0.12), reduced heart failure readmissions (0.07 vs. 0.57 EPPY, HR = 0.15, p = 0.008), and superior readmission‐free survival (HR = 0.47, log‐rank p = 0.04). Syncopal readmissions occurred exclusively in the F‐group (0.20 vs. 0 EPPY, p = 0.01).ConclusionResponses to inspiratory‐breath‐hold predicted hemodynamics and readmission risk. The impact of inspiratory‐breath‐hold on pulsatility can non‐invasively guide hemodynamic management decisions, patient optimization, and readmission risk stratification.

Publisher

Wiley

Subject

Biomedical Engineering,General Medicine,Biomaterials,Medicine (miscellaneous),Bioengineering

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3