Left ventricular assist device (LVAD) withdrawal with ventricular recovery represents the optimal outcome for patients previously implanted with an LVAD. The aim of this systematic review was to examine the patient outcomes of device withdrawal via minimally invasive pump decommissioning as compared with reoperation for pump explantation. An electronic search was performed to identify all studies in the English literature assessing LVAD withdrawal. All identified articles were systematically assessed for inclusion and exclusion criteria. Overall, 44 studies (85 patients) were included in the analysis, of whom 20% underwent decommissioning and 80% underwent explantation. The most commonly used LVAD types included the HeartMate II (decommissioning 23.5% vs. explantation 60.3%; p = 0.01) and HeartWare HVAD (decommissioning 76.5% vs. explantation 17.6%; p < 0.001). At median follow-up of 389 days, there were no significant differences in the incidence of cerebrovascular accidents (p = 0.88), infection (p = 0.75), and survival (p = 0.20). However, there was a trend toward a higher recurrence of heart failure in patients who underwent decommissioning as compared with explantation (decommissioning 15.4% vs. explantation 8.2%, cumulative hazard; p = 0.06). Decommissioning appears to be a feasible alternative to LVAD explantation in terms of overall patient outcomes.

Background: Saphenous vein grafts (SVG) are a commonly used conduit for coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery and can be harvested by either an open or endoscopic technique. Our goal was to evaluate long-term angiographic and clinical outcomes of open compared to endoscopic SVG harvest for CABG. Methods: Electronic search was performed to identify all studies in the English literature that compared open and endoscopic SVG harvesting for CABG with at least one year of follow-up. The primary outcome was graft patency. Secondary outcomes included perioperative morbidity and mortality. Results: Of 3,255 articles identified, a total of 11 studies were included for analysis. Of 18,131 patients, 10,873 (60%) patients underwent open SVG harvest and 7,258 (40%) patients underwent endoscopic SVG harvest. The mean age of patients was 65 years and 87% were male. The overall mean follow-up period was 2.6 years. During follow-up, patients who underwent open SVG harvest had superior graft patency per graft [open 82.3% vs. endoscopic 75.1%; OR: 0.61 (95% CI, 0.43-0.87); P=0.01], but higher rates of overall wound complications in the immediate post-operative period [open 3.3% vs. endoscopic 1.1%; OR: 0.02 (95% CI, 0.01-0.06); P<0.001]. Patients who underwent open SVG harvest had higher postoperative 30day mortality [open 3.4% vs. endoscopic 2.1%; OR: 0.59 (95% CI, 0.37-0.94); P=0.03], but no significant difference in overall mortality [open 4.9% vs. endoscopic 4.9%; OR: 0.34 (95% CI, 0.50-1.27); P=0.34]. Conclusions: Patients who underwent an open SVG harvest technique had improved graft patency and comparable overall mortality to endoscopic SVG harvest at average follow-up time of 2.6 years. Patients with open SVG harvest had higher rates of early wound complications and postoperative 30-day mortality, however, there was no difference in overall mortality.

Background: The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of patients undergoing SynCardia total artificial heart (TAH) and biventricular HeartWare ventricular assist device (Bi-HVAD) support for biventricular heart failure (HF). Methods: Electronic search was performed to identify all relevant studies detailing patients who underwent biventricular assist device implantation using Bi-HVAD devices and those who underwent TAH placement for biventricular HF. Twelve studies including 512 patients in the TAH group versus 38 patients in the Bi-HVAD group were pooled for meta-analysis. Results: Ischemic cardiac etiology was present in 32% (95% CI, 24-47) of TAH vs. 15% (95% CI, 4-44) of Bi-HVAD patients (P=0.21). There was a comparable incidence of stroke [TAH 11% (95% CI, 7-16) vs. Bi-HVAD 13% (95% CI, 2-51), P=0.86] and acute kidney injury [TAH 28% (95% CI, 2-89) vs. Bi-HVAD 27% (95% CI, 9-59), P=0.98]. Overall infection rate was 67% (95% CI, 47-82) in TAH and 36% (95% CI, 10-74) in Bi-HVAD (P=0.16). Driveline infections were comparable between the two groups [TAH 11% (95% CI, 6-19) vs. Bi-HVAD 8% (95% CI, 1-39), P=0.73] and although a higher incidence of mediastinitis was found in the Bi-HVAD group [TAH 4% (95% CI, 2-7) vs. Bi-HVAD 15% (95% CI, 4-45), P=0.07] there was no statistically significant difference between the groups. Postoperative bleeding was present in 42% (95% CI, 28-58) of TAH vs. 23% (95% CI, 8-52) of Bi-HVAD (P=0.22). Patients in the TAH group had shorter duration of support [TAH 71 days (95% CI, 15-127) vs. Bi-HVAD 167 days (95% CI, 116-217), P=0.01]. At the mean follow-up time of 120 days, (95% CI, 83-157) patients in both groups had similar overall mortality [TAH 36% (95% CI, 22-49) vs. Bi-HVAD 26% (95% CI, 6-46), P=0.44] including mortality on device support [TAH 26% (95% CI, 17-36) vs. Bi-HVAD 21% (95% CI, 4-37), P=0.55]. Discharge home on support was achieved in 6% (95% CI, 4-17%) of TAH patients vs. 73% (95% CI, 48-89%) of Bi-HVAD (P<0.01), and 68% (95% CI, 52-84) of TAH patients were transplanted vs. 61% (95% CI, 47-75) in the Bi-HVAD group (P=0.14). Conclusions: Patients on Bi-HVAD support were more likely to be able to be discharged home on support and had similar overall mortality to TAH, albeit with much longer duration of support.

CABG and PCI are both feasible modalities for revascularization in patients with TCAV where PCI is associated with lower mortality. There were no differences in outcomes among patients who underwent PCI with DES as compared to BMS. Potential bias may exist due to heterogeneity in available data. Further studies are needed to delineate evidence-based guidelines to tailor the appropriate therapy, CABG or PCI, to the appropriate patient.

Background: Long-term efficacy of heart retransplantation (RTx) for end-stage cardiac allograft failure remains unclear given the limited worldwide experience and is an important question to elucidate given the shortage of donor organs. The aim of this systematic review was to examine the outcomes of RTx in patients with cardiac allograft failure.Methods: Electronic search was performed to identify all studies in the English literature assessing RTx for cardiac allograft failure. All identified articles were systematically assessed for inclusion and exclusion criteria.Results: Eleven studies were included for analysis, with a total of 7,791 patients. A total of 7,446 patients underwent primary heart transplantation (HTx) whereas 345 patients underwent RTx with average time from primary HTx to RTx interval of 5.03 years (95% CI: 3.13-6.94 years). There were 35.2% of patients Conclusions:Patients who underwent heart RTx had a significant lower survival when compared to those who only underwent primary HTx. There were no significant differences in post-transplantation freedom from rejection. Careful patient selection and perioperative care can make heart RTx a viable option for selected recipients.