Search

Abstract A 47‐year old male with ischaemic cardiomyopathy was referred to us for durable left ventricular assist device placement. He was found to have prohibitively elevated pulmonary vascular resistance for heart transplantation. He underwent HeartMate 3 left ventricular assist device implantation, with additional temporary right ventricular assist device (RVAD) placement. Following a 2‐week period of unweanable temporary right ventricular support, the patient was switched to durable biventricular support with two Heartmate 3 pumps. The patient was placed on a transplant waiting list but was not offered a heart for over 4 years. While on Heartmate 3 biventricular support (BiVAD), he returned to full activity and enjoyed an excellent quality of life. He underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy 7 months after the BIVAD implant. After 52 months of uneventful BiVAD support, he presented with a combination of adverse events that occurred over a short period. These included subarachnoidal haemorrhage and a new motor deficit, followed by RVAD infection and RVAD low‐flow alarms. After over 4 years of unimpeded RVAD flows, new imaging revealed an outflow graft twist with subsequent flow reduction. The patient underwent heart transplantation after a total of 1655 days of Heartmate 3 BiVAD support and continues to do well on latest follow‐up.

Abstract Aims Use of left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) in older patients has increased, and assessing outcomes in older LVAD recipients is important. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate associations between age and outcomes after continuous‐flow LVAD (cf‐LVAD) implantation. Methods and results Cf‐LVAD patients from the multicentre European PCHF‐VAD registry were included and categorized into those

Abstract Aims Data on sex and left ventricular assist device (LVAD) utilization and outcomes have been conflicting and mostly confined to US studies incorporating older devices. This study aimed to investigate sex‐related differences in LVAD utilization and outcomes in a contemporary European LVAD cohort. Methods and results This analysis is part of the multicentre PCHF‐VAD registry studying continuous‐flow LVAD patients. The primary outcome was all‐cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included ventricular arrhythmias, right ventricular failure, bleeding, thromboembolism, and the haemocompatibility score. Multivariable Cox regression models were used to assess associations between sex and outcomes. Overall, 457 men (81%) and 105 women (19%) were analysed. At LVAD implant, women were more often in Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support (INTERMACS) profile 1 or 2 (55% vs. 41%, P = 0.009) and more often required temporary mechanical circulatory support (39% vs. 23%, P = 0.001). Mean age was comparable (52.1 vs. 53.4 years, P = 0.33), and median follow‐up duration was 344 [range 147–823] days for women and 435 [range 190–816] days for men (P = 0.40). No significant sex‐related differences were found in all‐cause mortality (hazard ratio [HR] 0.79 for female vs. male sex, 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.50–1.27]). Female LVAD patients had a lower risk of ventricular arrhythmias (HR 0.56, 95% CI [0.33–0.95]) but more often experienced right ventricular failure. No significant sex‐related differences were found in other outcomes. Conclusions In this contemporary European cohort of LVAD patients, far fewer women than men underwent LVAD implantation despite similar clinical outcomes. This is important as the proportion of female LVAD patients (19%) was lower than the proportion of females with advanced HF as reported in previous studies, suggesting underutilization. Also, female patients were remarkably more often in INTERMACS profile 1 or 2, suggesting later referral for LVAD therapy. Additional research in female patients is warranted.

Background Studies demonstrated sex differences in outcomes following acute myocardial infarction, with women more likely to develop heart failure (HF). Sacubitril/valsartan has been shown to reduce cardiovascular death and HF hospitalizations in patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction. Methods and Results A total of 5661 patients (1363 women [24%]) with acute myocardial infarction complicated by reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (≤40%), pulmonary congestion, or both and ≥1 of 8 risk‐augmenting factors were randomized to receive sacubitril/valsartan or ramipril. The primary outcome was cardiovascular death or incident HF. Baseline characteristics, clinical outcomes, and safety events were compared according to sex, a prespecified subgroup. Female participants were older and had more comorbidities. After multivariable adjustment, women and men were at similar risks for cardiovascular death or all‐cause death. Women were more likely to have first HF hospitalization (hazard ratio [HR], 1.34 [95% CI, 1.05–1.70]; P=0.02) and total HF hospitalizations (HR, 1.39 [95% CI, 1.05–1.84]; P=0.02). Sex did not significantly modify the treatment effect of sacubitril/valsartan compared with ramipril on the primary outcome (P for interaction=0.11). Conclusions In contemporary patients who presented with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction, pulmonary congestion, or both, following acute myocardial infarction, women had a higher incidence of HF during follow‐up. Sex did not modify the treatment effect of sacubitril/valsartan relative to ramipril. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02924727.

Abstract Aims Natriuretic peptide (NP) uptake varies in Emergency Departments (EDs) across Europe. The ‘Peptide for Life’ (P4L) initiative, led by Heart Failure Association, aims to enhance NP utilization for early diagnosis of heart failure (HF). We tested the hypothesis that implementing an educational campaign in Western Balkan countries would significantly increase NP adoption rates in the ED. Methods and results This registry examined NP adoption before and after implementing the P4L‐ED study across 10 centres in five countries: Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Montenegro, North Macedonia, and Serbia. A train‐the‐trainer programme was implemented to enhance awareness of NP testing in the ED, and centres without access received point‐of‐care instruments. Differences in NP testing between the pre‐P4L‐ED and post‐P4L‐ED phases were evaluated. A total of 2519 patients were enrolled in the study: 1224 (48.6%) in the pre‐P4L‐ED phase and 1295 (51.4%) in the post‐P4L‐ED phase. NP testing was performed in the ED on 684 patients (55.9%) during the pre‐P4L‐ED phase and on 1039 patients (80.3%) during the post‐P4L‐ED phase, indicating a significant absolute difference of 24.4% (95% CI: 20.8% to 27.9%, P