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

Abstract

BackgroundDynamic 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.