Unlike the ascending aorta and aortic arch, there was no association between the descending aorta and APOE*E4. Potential reasons for this include the fact that the progression of atherosclerosis in the aorta is influenced by the flow dynamics and wall shear stress within the segments of the aorta. 4 For example, the higher ejection velocity in the ascending aorta might limit formation of plaques in this region. More importantly, the influence of age on atherosclerosis is very strong, with an incidence rising steadily with age. 5 Because patients undergoing cardiac surgery are increasingly elderly, the effect of APOE*E4 might be masked by the dominating influence of age on atherosclerosis, particularly in the descending aorta.Limitations to our study include the fact that our technique uses a 2-dimensional, rather than 3-dimensional, image of a specific aortic segment. Nevertheless, the percentage of atheroma method that we used does at least account for total plaque area that can be visualized. Finally, epiaortic imaging is a more sensitive measure of assessing plaque in the ascending aorta, and it is possible that a greater degree of atherosclerosis might have been detected, with its use potentially improving the link between atheroma burden and the APOE*E4 allele.

The increasing use of ventricular assist devices (VADs) in terminal heart failure patients provides new challenges to cardiac rehabilitation physicians. Structured cardiac rehabilitation strategies are still poorly implemented for this special patient group. Clear guidance and more evidence for optimal modalities are needed. Thereby, attention has to be paid to specific aspects, such as psychological and social support and education (e.g., device management, INR self-management, drive-line care, and medication).In Germany, the post-implant treatment and rehabilitation of VAD Patients working group was founded in 2012. This working group has developed clear recommendations for the rehabilitation of VAD patients according to the available literature. All facets of VAD patients' rehabilitation are covered. The present paper is unique in Europe and represents a milestone to overcome the heterogeneity of VAD patient rehabilitation.

Adequate physical and functional performance is an important prerequisite for renewed participation and integration in self-determined private and (where appropriate) professional lives following left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation. During cardiac rehabilitation (CR), individually adapted exercise programs aim to increase exercise capacity and functional performance. A retrospective analysis of cardiopulmonary exercise capacity and functional performance in LVAD patients at discharge from a cardiac rehabilitation program was conducted. The results from 68 LVAD patients (59 males, 9 females; 55.9 6 11.7 years; 47 HVAD, 2 MVAD, 15 HeartMate II, 4 HeartMate 3, and 4 different implanting centers) were included in the analysis. Exercise capacity was assessed using a cardiopulmonary exercise test on a bicycle ergometer (ramp protocol; 10 W/min). The 6-min walk test was used to determine functional performance. At discharge from CR (53 6 17 days after implantation), the mean peak work load achieved was 62.2 6 19.3 W (38% of predicted values) or 0.79 6 0.25 W/kg body weight. The mean cardiopulmonary exercise capacity (relative peak oxygen uptake) was 10.6 6 5.3 mL/kg/min (37% of predicted values). The 6-min walk distance improved significantly during CR (325 6 106 to 405 6 77 m; P < 0.01). No adverse events were documented during CR. The results show that, even following LVAD implantation, cardiopulmonary exercise capacity remains considerably restricted. In contrast, functional performance, measured by the 6-min walk distance, reaches an acceptable level. Light everyday tasks seem to be realistically surmountable for patients, making discharge from inpatient rehabilitation possible. Long-term monitoring is required in order to evaluate the situation and how it develops further. Key Words: Heart failure-Left ventricular assist deviceCardiac rehabilitation-Exercise capacity-Functional performance.In the last few years, left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) have been increasingly implanted as treatment for terminal heart failure (HF). Whereas initially these systems were only used as a bridge to transplantation (BTT), today approximately half of all recipients have them implanted as the ultimate destination therapy (DT) (1).The overriding therapeutic goal of LVAD implantation is to ensure patient survival and guarantee preservation of organ function (2). However, when patients become permanently dependent on the system, a return to everyday life and restoration of an acceptable quality of life acquire crucial significance. An optimum build-up of exercise capacity and adequate functional performance is therefore very significant. Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) can and should make an important contribution in this context (3,4). After being discharged from a CR center the patients should once more become able to autonomously manage the necessary tasks in their everyday lives back home.Over the last few years, several studies have emerged, most of them small, which report results following rehabilitat...

Cardiac rehabilitation physicians are faced to an increasing number of heart failure patients supported by left ventricular assist devices (LVAD). Many of these patients have complex medical issues and prolonged hospitalizations and therefore need special cardiac rehabilitation strategies including psychological, social, and educational support which are actually poorly implemented.Cardiac rehabilitation with clear guidance and more evidence should be considered as an essential component of the patient care plan especially regarding the increasing number of destination patients and their long-term follow-up.In this article the working group for postimplant treatment and rehabilitation of LVAD patients of the German Society for Prevention and Rehabilitation of Cardiovascular Diseases has summarized and updated the recommendations for the cardiac rehabilitation of LVAD patients considering the latest literature.

Background: Although cardiovascular rehabilitation (CR) is well accepted in general, CR-attendance and delivery still considerably vary between the European countries. Moreover, clinical and prognostic effects of CR are not well established for a variety of cardiovascular diseases. Methods: The guidelines address all aspects of CR including indications, contents and delivery. By processing the guidelines, every step was externally supervised and moderated by independent members of the “Association of the Scientific Medical Societies in Germany” (AWMF). Four meta-analyses were performed to evaluate the prognostic effect of CR after acute coronary syndrome (ACS), after coronary bypass grafting (CABG), in patients with severe chronic systolic heart failure (HFrEF), and to define the effect of psychological interventions during CR. All other indications for CR-delivery were based on a predefined semi-structured literature search and recommendations were established by a formal consenting process including all medical societies involved in guideline generation. Results: Multidisciplinary CR is associated with a significant reduction in all-cause mortality in patients after ACS and after CABG, whereas HFrEF-patients (left ventricular ejection fraction <40%) especially benefit in terms of exercise capacity and health-related quality of life. Patients with other cardiovascular diseases also benefit from CR-participation, but the scientific evidence is less clear. There is increasing evidence that the beneficial effect of CR strongly depends on “treatment intensity” including medical supervision, treatment of cardiovascular risk factors, information and education, and a minimum of individually adapted exercise volume. Additional psychologic interventions should be performed on the basis of individual needs. Conclusions: These guidelines reinforce the substantial benefit of CR in specific clinical indications, but also describe remaining deficits in CR-delivery in clinical practice as well as in CR-science with respect to methodology and presentation.

No abstract

Over time left ventricular assist devices (LVAD) have become an alternative to heart transplantation because of enormous technical development and miniaturization. Most patients present a significant improvement in clinical conditions and exercise capacity. Nevertheless, exercise tolerance remains markedly limited even after LVAD implantation compared to a control group. The complex physiological and hemodynamic changes in LVAD patients, both at rest and during exercise, are not yet understood, or at least not completely.It is the aim of the present paper to describe the current state of scientific knowledge. Furthermore, the spectrum of diagnostic tools, including the noninvasive inert gas rebreathing method for measurement of cardiac output and associate parameters, are discussed. Options for training control in this special patient group are presented.

Although the natural history of acute myocarditis leads to complete recovery in the majority of patients, rapid and irreversible cardiac decompensation resulting in death is known to occur. One possible therapy to improve the poor prognosis of this patient group may be the implantation of circulatory support systems that allow myocardial recovery or bridging to heart transplantation. Therapeutic protocols have been suggested, but clinical experiences in this area are few. In this paper we report on our clinical experiences in cardiogenic shock after acute fulminant myocarditis using different types of circulatory support systems. Three different systems were used: a biomedicus centrifugal pump as a ventricular assist device (VAD) or femoro-femoral bypass (FFB) including oxygenator; Abiomed BVS 5000, and Thoratec ventricular assist device. Hemodynamic criteria for implantation of support systems were cardiac index < 2.0 L/min/m2. SVR = 1000 dyne-s-cm-5, central venous pressure (CVP) or left atrial pressure (LAP) > 20 mm Hg, and urine output < 20 ml/h despite maximal pharmacological therapy. Age total of 5 patients (mean age 29 years, range 15-55 years) in cardiogenic shock after acute fulminant myocarditis were included. Two patients initially were supported for stabilization and transportation from an outside hospital by FFB. Both patients died after a support time of 24 h because of multiorgan failure or neurological disorders after longer periods of resuscitation in the referral hospital. The third patient (55 years) received the Biomedicus pump as CVAD. Myocardial function recovered after a support time of 120 h, and the patient could be weaned. Unfortunately, 2 days after weaning, he developed malignant arrhythmias and died. The 2 remaining patients (15 years and 27 years) with diagnosis of acute fulminant virus myocarditis were supported by biventricular assist device (1 x Thoratec/111 days, 1 x Abiomed/7 days). During the entire time of support, there were no signs of myocardial recovery. The patients were accepted for the heart transplantation (HTX) program. In both cases, HTXs were performed without any complication. The postoperative course was uneventful. The results of mechanical circulatory support in patients with acute fulminant myocarditis are encouraging and justify the resources.