Search

Long-term outcomes of patients with advanced heart failure treated with durable left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) have been augmented due to improved durability and hemocompatibility on the backbone of pump engineering enhancements. The incidence of hemocompatibility-related adverse events (pump thrombosis, stroke and nonsurgical bleeding events) are device specific and vary by type of engineered pump. A fully magnetically levitated rotor containing LVAD in concert with use of antithrombotic therapy has successfully overcome an increased risk of pump thrombosis and stroke-risk, albeit with only modest reduction in bleeding events. Modifications to antithrombotic strategies have focused on reduced-dose vitamin K antagonist use or use of direct oral anticoagulants with demonstration of safety and progress in reduction of mucosal bleeding episodes with elimination of antiplatelet agents. This review outlines the current landscape of advances in anticoagulation management in LVAD patients, highlighting the need for ongoing research and cautious application of emerging therapies and technologies., Competing Interests: Disclosures Dr. Cikes reports investigator-initiated research grants to institutions: Novartis, Abbott, Pfizer; Clinical Study Contracts with institutions: Novo Nordisk, CorVia; advisory role, speaker honoraria, travel grants: Abbott, Abiomed, Amgen, Amicus Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Bristol Meyers Squibb, GE Healthcare, Krka Pharma, Novartis, NovoNordisk, Pfizer, Pulsify Medical, Roche, Swixx, Takeda, Teva Pharmaceutical Industries, Viatris. Dr. Yuzefpolskaya reports consulting fees and research grant support from Abbott. Dr. Gustafsson reports research grants from Pfizer and the Novo Nordisk Foundation; advisory board honoraria from Bayer, Pfizer, Abbott, Ionis, and Alnylam; and speakers fees from AstraZeneca, Novartis, and Orion Pharma. Dr. Mehra reports payments made to his institution from Abbott for consulting; consulting fees from Mesoblast, Janssen, Moderna, Paragonix, Natera, and the Baim Institute for Clinical Research, Second Heart Assist, and Cadrenal; advisory board member for Transmedics, NuPulseCV, Leviticus, and FineHeart., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: The HeartMate 3 (Abbott) left ventricular assist device provides substantial improvement in long-term morbidity and mortality in patients with advanced heart failure. The Implantation of the HeartMate 3 in Subjects With Heart Failure Using Surgical Techniques Other Than Full Median Sternotomy study compares thoracotomy-based implantation clinical outcomes with standard median sternotomy., Methods: We conducted a prospective, multicenter, single-arm study in patients eligible for HeartMate 3 implantation with thoracotomy-based surgical technique (bilateral thoracotomy or partial upper sternotomy with left thoracotomy). The composite primary end point was survival free of disabling stroke (modified Rankin score >3), or reoperation to remove or replace a malfunctioning device, or conversion to median sternotomy at 6-months postimplant (elective transplants were treated as a success). The primary end point (noninferiority, -15% margin) was assessed with >90% power compared with a propensity score-matched cohort (ratio 1:2) derived from the Multi-Center Study of MagLev Technology in Patients Undergoing Mechanical Circulatory Support Therapy With HeartMate 3 continued access protocol., Results: The study enrolled 102 patients between December 2020 and July 2022 in the thoracotomy-based arm at 23 North American centers. Follow-up concluded in December 2022. In the Implantation of the HeartMate 3 in Subjects With Heart Failure Using Surgical Techniques Other Than Full Median Sternotomy study group, noninferiority criteria was met (absolute between-group difference, -1.2%; Farrington Manning lower 1-sided 95% CI, -9.3%; P < .0025) and event-free survival was not different (85.0% vs 86.2%; hazard ratio, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.58-2.10). Length of stay with thoracotomy-based implant was longer (median, 20 vs 17 days; P = .03). No differences were observed for blood product utilization, adverse events (including right heart failure), functional status, and quality of life between cohorts., Conclusions: Thoracotomy-based implantation of the HeartMate 3 left ventricular assist device is noninferior to implantation via standard full sternotomy. This study supports thoracotomy-based implantation as an additional standard for surgical implantation of the HeartMate 3 left ventricular assist device., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest Statement Dr Gosev reports consulting for Abbott. Dr Pham reports consulting for Abbott, Abiomed, and Medtronic. Dr Itoh reports speaker honoraria from Abbott and Abiomed. Dr Kotkar is a speaker (nonfinancial) for Abiomed and 3M. Dr Naka reports consulting for Abbott, Biomet-Zimmer, Cryolife, and receiving speaker’s fees for Nipro Co. Dr Peltz reports research support from Bridge to Life Ltd and Paragonix Inc. Dr Silvestry reports consulting for Abbott, Abiomed, Medtronic, and data and safety monitoring board participation for Carmat. Dr Leacche reports consulting for Abbott and advisory board participation for Abiomed. Dr Rao reports consulting for Abbott, Medtronic, and Gore. Dr Sun reports consulting for Abbott. Dr Tedford reports consulting for Abbott, Medtronic, Aria CV Inc, Alleviant, Acorai, Acceleron, Cytokinetics, Itamar, Edwards LifeSciences, Eidos Therapeutics, Lexicon Pharmaceuticals, Gradient, and United Therapeutics. He is the national co-principal investigator for the RIGHT-FLOW clinical trial (Edwards), serves on steering committees for Merck, and a research advisory board for Abiomed. He also does hemodynamic core lab work for Merck. Dr Mokadam reports consulting for Abbott, Medtronic, SynCardia, Carmat, and Xylocor. Drs McNutt and Crandall are employees of Abbott. Dr Mehra reports payment made to institution from Abbott for consulting; consulting fees from Mesoblast, Janssen, Moderna, and Paragonix, and Baim Institute for clinical research; he is an advisory board member for Transmedics, NuPulseCV, Leviticus, and FineHeart. Dr Salerno reports consulting for Abbott. All other authors reported no conflicts of interest. The Journal policy requires editors and reviewers to disclose conflicts of interest and to decline handling manuscripts for which they may have a conflict of interest. The editors and reviewers of this article reported no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Hemocompatibility-related adverse events affect patients after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation but are hard to predict., Objectives: Dynamic risk modeling with a multistate model can predict risk of gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB), stroke, or death in ambulatory patients., Methods: This was a secondary analysis of the MOMENTUM 3 (Multicenter Study of MagLev Technology in Patients Undergoing Mechanical Circulatory Support Therapy with HeartMate 3) trial. HeartMate 3 LVAD recipients who survived to hospital discharge and were followed for up to 2 years. A total of 145 variables were included in the multistate model with multivariate logistic regression. Model performance was assessed with the area under the curve in a holdout validation cohort. A risk stratification tool was created by dividing patients into categories of predicted risk using the final model variables and associated OR., Results: Among 2,056 LVAD patients, the median age was 59.4 years (20.4% women, 28.6% Black). At 2 years, the incidence of GIB, stroke, and death was 25.6%, 6.0%, and 12.3%, respectively. The multistate model included 39 total variables to predict risk of GIB (16 variables), stroke (10 variables), and death (19 variables). When ambulatory patients were classified according to their risk category, the 30-day observed event rate in the highest risk group for GIB, stroke, or death was 26.9%, 1.8%, and 4.8%, respectively. The multistate model predicted GIB, stroke, and death at any 30-day period with an area under the curve of 0.70, 0.69, and 0.86, respectively., Conclusions: The multistate model informs 30-day risk in ambulatory LVAD recipients and allows recalculation of risk as new patient-specific data become available. The model allows for accurate risk stratification that predicts impending adverse events and may guide clinical decision making. (MOMENTUM 3 IDE Clinical Study Protocol; NCT02224755)., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Abbott is the sponsor of the MOMENTUM 3 studies. Abbott supported an investigator-initiated grant paid to the Inova Heart and Vascular Institute to support this effort; and Abbott has filed a U.S. provisional patent (U.S. Patent Application No. 63/421,450) for the work presented in the paper. Dr Shah is supported by National Institutes of Health K23 Career Development Award 1K23HL143179; has received consulting fees from Procyrion, Merck, and Natera; and grant support has been paid to his institution from Abbott, Roche, Merck, and Bayer. Dr Sayer has received consulting fees from Abbott. Dr Kanwar is on the medical advisory board for Abiomed, CorWave, and CareDx. Dr Cowger has served as a consultant for Abbott, Medtronic, Bioventrix, Endotronix, Bivacor, and Procyrion; and has received grant support and speaker fees from Abbott. Dr Pagani has served as an AD hoc scientific advisor without compensation for FineHeart, Medtronic, CH Biomedical, and Abbott; has served as medical monitor for Abiomed; is a member of the data safety monitoring board for Carmat and the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute PumpKIN clinical trial; and is Chair of the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Intermacs Task Force. Dr Mehra has received travel support and consulting fees, paid to Brigham and Women’s Hospital, from Abbott; has received fees for serving on a steering committee from Medtronic and Janssen (Johnson and Johnson); has received fees for serving on a data and safety monitoring board from Mesoblast; has received consulting fees from Natera, Paragonix, Moderna, Baim Institute of Clinical Research, and Broadview Ventures; and has received fees for serving as a scientific board member from NuPulseCV, Leviticus, and FineHeart. Dr Cleveland has received fees from Abbott and Medtronic. Dr Desai is on the Speakers Bureau for Abbott. Drs Lu, Hu, Connolly, and Kormos are employees of Abbott. Dr Uriel is a medical advisory board member for Livemetric, Levitcus, and Revamp; and receives grant support from Abbott, Abiomed, and Fire 1. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Right heart failure (RHF) following implantation of a left ventricular assist device (LVAD) is a common and potentially serious condition with a wide spectrum of clinical presentations with an unfavourable effect on patient outcomes. Clinical scores that predict the occurrence of right ventricular (RV) failure have included multiple clinical, biochemical, imaging and haemodynamic parameters. However, unless the right ventricle is overtly dysfunctional with end-organ involvement, prediction of RHF post-LVAD implantation is, in most cases, difficult and inaccurate. For these reasons optimization of RV function in every patient is a reasonable practice aiming at preparing the right ventricle for a new and challenging haemodynamic environment after LVAD implantation. To this end, the institution of diuretics, inotropes and even temporary mechanical circulatory support may improve RV function, thereby preparing it for a better adaptation post-LVAD implantation. Furthermore, meticulous management of patients during the perioperative and immediate postoperative period should facilitate identification of RV failure refractory to medication. When RHF occurs late during chronic LVAD support, this is associated with worse long-term outcomes. Careful monitoring of RV function and characterization of the origination deficit should therefore continue throughout the patient's entire follow-up. Despite the useful information provided by the echocardiogram with respect to RV function, right heart catheterization frequently offers additional support for the assessment and optimization of RV function in LVAD-supported patients. In any patient candidate for LVAD therapy, evaluation and treatment of RV function and failure should be assessed in a multidimensional and multidisciplinary manner., (© 2024 European Society of Cardiology.)

Left ventricular assist devices (LVADs), which were introduced as a bridge to heart transplantation, are now an established alternative to heart transplantation (HT) for patients with advanced heart failure. These devices have undergone significant technological advancements over the years, and contemporary LVADs prolong life substantially in patients dependent on inotropic therapy or in those with severe ambulatory advanced heart failure with a median survival that exceeds 5 y, and most patients benefit from a doubling in functional capacity, even among those intended as destination therapy because of ineligibility for transplantation. Other intended goals for LVAD implantation consist of (1) bridge to remission or recovery and (2) bridge to transplant or candidacy for transplant. In the former situation, few selected patients underwent LVAD implantation, facilitating myocardial remission to recovery that allowed explantation. Among those bridged to transplantation, survival in the intended goal was excellent, with 80% success at 5 y (with a 50% rate of transplantation). In this review, we provide a brief historical background on the evolution of LVADs and discuss outcomes with contemporary pumps, immunological and infection-related impact of such devices, impact of bridging in HT, and use of devices for facilitating myocardial recovery and remission. Furthermore, we discuss implications of HT allocation policies, with a specific focus within the United States, and outline future perspectives and novel device in development., Competing Interests: M.R.M. reports payment made to institution from Abbott for consulting, consulting fees from Mesoblast, Janssen, Moderna, Paragonix, and Baim Institute for Clinical Research, and advisory board member for Transmedics, NuPulseCV, Leviticus, and FineHeart. The other authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and sinus rhythm have a heightened risk of stroke. Whether anticoagulation benefits these patients is uncertain. In this post hoc analysis of the A Study to Assess the Effectiveness and Safety of Rivaroxaban in Reducing the Risk of Death, Myocardial Infarction, or Stroke in Participants with Heart Failure and Coronary Artery Disease Following an Episode of Decompensated Heart Failure (COMMANDER-HF) trial we evaluated how a previously validated risk model consisting of 3 variables (history of prior stroke, insulin-treated diabetes, and N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide level) would perform, compared with plasma d-dimer, for stroke prediction and estimation of the benefit of low-dose rivaroxaban., Methods and Results: Stroke risk and treatment effect were computed across risk score and plasma d-dimer tertiles. Risk score was available in 58% of the COMMANDER-HF population (n = 2928). Over a median follow-up of 512 days (range 342-747 days), 60 patients experienced a stroke (14.6 per 1000 patient-years). The risk model did not identify patients at higher risk of stroke and showed a low overall prognostic performance (C-index = 0.53). The effect of rivaroxaban on stroke was homogeneous across risk score tertiles (P-interaction = .67). Among patients in whom the risk score was estimated, d-dimer was available in 2343 (80%). d-dimer had an acceptable discrimination performance for stroke prediction (C-index = 0.66) and higher plasma d-dimer concentrations were associated with higher rates of stroke (ie, tertile 3 vs tertile 1, hazard ratio 3.65, 95% confidence interval 1.59-8.39, P = .002). Treatment with low-dose rivaroxaban reduced the incidence of stroke in patients at highest risk by d-dimer levels (ie, >515 ng/mL, hazard ratio 0.42, 95% confidence interval 0.18-0.95, P-interaction = .074), without any safety concerns., Conclusions: In our analysis, plasma d-dimer concentrations performed better than a previously described 3-variable risk score for stroke prediction in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, a recent clinical worsening and sinus rhythm as enrolled in the COMMANDER-HF trial. In these patients, a raised plasma d-dimer concentration identified patients who might benefit most from rivaroxaban., Competing Interests: DISCLOSURES L.M. has received lecture fees from AstraZeneca and Vifor. N.G. has received personal fees from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer, Lilly, Novartis, Roche Diagnostics, and Vifor Pharma. J.P.F. has received consulting fees from Boheringer Ingelheim. S.A. has received grants and personal fees from Abbott Vascular and Vifor; and has received personal fees from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Brahms GmbH, Cardiac Dimensions, Cordio, Novartis, and Servier. J.G.F.C. has received personal fees from Janssen Research & Development LLC as a member of the steering committee of the COMMANDER HF trial; and has received grants and honoraria for speaking, committees, and advisory boards from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Johnson & Johnson, Medtronic, MyoKardia, Novartis, Philips Healthcare, Pharmacosmos, Pharma Nord, Sanofi, Laboratoires Servier, Stealth BioTherapeutics, Torrent Pharmaceuticals, and Vifor Pharma. T.K. has received lecture fees from Ono Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., Novartis Pharma K.K., AstraZeneca K.K., Bristol-Myers Squibb Co., Abiomed Japan K.K., and Boehringer Ingelheim. J.J.V.M. has received payments through Glasgow University from work on clinical trials, consulting, and other activities from Alnylam, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, Cardurion, Cytokinetics, DalCor, GSK, Ionis, KBP Biosciences, Novartis, Pfizer, Theracos; and has received personal lecture fees from the Corpus, Abbott, Hikma, Sun Pharmaceuticals, Medscape/Heart.Org, Radcliffe Cardiology, Servier Director, and Global Clinical Trial Partners (GCTP). C.S.P.L. is supported by a Clinician Scientist Award from the National Medical Research Council of Singapore; has received research support from Boston Scientific, Bayer, Roche Diagnostics, AstraZeneca, Medtronic, and Vifor Pharma; has served as consultant or on the Advisory Board/Steering Committee/Executive Committee for Boston Scientific, Bayer, Roche Diagnostics, AstraZeneca, Medtronic, Vifor Pharma, Novartis, Amgen, Merck, Janssen Research & Development LLC, Menarini, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novo Nordisk, Abbott Diagnostics, Corvia, Stealth BioTherapeutics, JanaCare, Biofourmis, Darma, Applied Therapeutics, MyoKardia, Cytokinetics, WebMD Global LLC, Radcliffe Group Ltd and Corpus; and serves as co-founder and non-executive director of eKo.ai. M.R.M. has consulting relationships with Abbott, Medtronic, Janssen, Mesoblast, Portola, Bayer, NupulseCV, FineHeart, Leviticus, Roivant, Baim Institute for Clinical Research, and Triple Gene. D.J.v.V. has received fees for serving on a steering committee and travel support from ARCA Biopharma and Corvia Medical. B.G. has received personal fees from Novartis, Janssen, Sanofi, Mesoblast, Zensun, Cellular Dynamics, MyoKardia, Bayer, Actelion, Viking, Amgen, Akcea, EBR System, IONIS, and Tenaya; and was co-chair of the COMMANDER-HF steering committee. F.Z. has received personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen, Novartis, Boston Scientific, Amgen, CVRx, AstraZeneca, Vifor Fresenius, Cardior, Cereno Pharmaceutical, Applied Therapeutics, Merck, Bayer, Cellprothera, CVCT, and Cardiorenal. All other authors report no disclosures., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The Heartmate 3 (HM3) risk score (HM3RS) was derived and validated internally from within the Multicenter Study of MagLev Technology in Patients Undergoing Mechanical Circulatory Support Therapy with HeartMate 3 (MOMENTUM 3) trial population and provides 1- and 2-year mortality risk prediction for patients in those before HM3 left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation. We aimed to evaluate the HM3RS in nontrial unselected patients, including those not meeting inclusion criteria for MOMENTUM 3 trial enrollment., Methods: Patients who underwent HM3 LVAD implant at 1 of 7 US centers between 2017 and 2021, with at least 1-year follow-up, were included in this analysis. Patients were retrospectively assessed for their eligibility for the MOMENTUM 3 trial based on study inclusion and exclusion criteria. HM3RS risk discrimination was evaluated using time-dependent receiver operating characteristic curve analysis for 1-year mortality for all patients and further stratified by MOMENTUM 3 trial eligibility. Kaplan-Meier curves were constructed using the HM3RS-based risk categories., Results: Of 521 patients included in the analysis, 266 (51.1%) would have met enrollment criteria for MOMENTUM 3. The 1- and 2-year survival for the total cohort was 85% and 81%, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference in survival between those who met and did not meet enrollment criteria at 1 (87% vs 83%; p = 0.21) and 2 years postimplant (80% vs 78%; p = 0.39). For the total cohort, HM3RS predicted 1-year survival with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.63 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.57-0.69, p < 0.001). HM3RS performed better in the subset of patients meeting enrollment criteria: AUC 0.69 (95% CI:0.61-0.77, p < 0.001) compared to the subset that did not: AUC 0.58 (95% CI: 0.49-0.66, p = 0.078)., Conclusions: In this real-world evidence, multicenter cohort, 1- and 2-year survival after commercial HM3 LVAD implant was excellent, regardless of trial eligibility. The HM3RS provided adequate risk discrimination in "trial-like" patients, but predictive value was reduced in patients who did not meet trial criteria., (Copyright © 2023 International Society for the Heart and Lung Transplantation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The HeartMate 3 (HM 3; Abbott) left ventricular assist device (LVAD) has improved hemocompatibility-related adverse outcomes. In sporadic cases, external compression of the outflow graft causing obstruction (eOGO) can result from substance accumulation between the outflow graft and its bend relief. We sought to evaluate the prevalence, course, and clinical implications of eOGO in an international study., Methods: A multicenter retrospective analysis of HM 3 LVADs implanted between November 2014 and April 2021 (n = 2108) was conducted across 17 cardiac centers in 8 countries. We defined eOGO as obstruction >25% in the cross-sectional area in imaging (percutaneous angiography, computed tomography, or intravascular ultrasound). The prevalence and annual incidence were calculated. Serious adverse events and outcomes (death, transplantation, or device exchange) were analyzed for eOGO cases., Results: Of 2108 patients, 62 were diagnosed with eOGO at a median LVAD support duration of 953 (interquartile range, 600-1267) days. The prevalence of eOGO was 3.0% and the incidence at 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 years of support was 0.6%, 2.8%, 4.0%, 5.2%, and 9.1%, respectively. Of 62 patients, 9 were observed, 27 underwent surgical revision, 15 underwent percutaneous stent implantation, 8 received a heart transplant, and 2 died before intervention. One patient underwent surgical revision and later stent implantation. The mortality with therapeutic intervention was 9/53 (17.0%)., Conclusions: Although uncommon, HM 3 LVAD-supported patients might develop eOGO with an increasing incidence after 1 year of support. Although engineering efforts to reduce this complication are under way, clinicians must maintain a focus on early detection and remain vigilant., (Copyright © 2022 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery. All rights reserved.)

Background: Trials evaluating implantable hemodynamic monitors to manage patients with heart failure (HF) have shown reductions in HF hospitalizations but not mortality. Prior meta-analyses assessing mortality have been limited in construct because of an absence of patient-level data, short-term follow-up duration, and evaluation across the combined spectrum of ejection fractions., Objectives: The purpose of this meta-analysis was to determine whether management with implantable hemodynamic monitors reduces mortality in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and to confirm the effect of hemodynamic-monitoring guided management on HF hospitalization reduction reported in previous studies., Methods: The patient-level pooled meta-analysis used 3 randomized studies (GUIDE-HF [Hemodynamic-Guided Management of Heart Failure], CHAMPION [CardioMEMS Heart Sensor Allows Monitoring of Pressure to Improve Outcomes in NYHA Class III Heart Failure Patients], and LAPTOP-HF [Left Atrial Pressure Monitoring to Optimize Heart Failure Therapy]) of implantable hemodynamic monitors (2 measuring pulmonary artery pressures and 1 measuring left atrial pressure) to assess the effect on all-cause mortality and HF hospitalizations., Results: A total of 1,350 patients with HFrEF were included. Hemodynamic-monitoring guided management significantly reduced overall mortality with an HR of 0.75 (95% CI: 0.57-0.99); P = 0.043. HF hospitalizations were significantly reduced with an HR of 0.64 (95% CI: 0.55-0.76); P < 0.0001., Conclusions: Management of patients with HFrEF using an implantable hemodynamic monitor significantly reduces both mortality and HF hospitalizations. The reduction in HF hospitalizations is seen early in the first year of monitoring and mortality benefits occur after the first year., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Abbott (Abbott Park, Illinois) funded the CHAMPION, LAPTOP-HF, and GUIDE-HF studies. Dr Lindenfeld has received consulting fees from Abbott, Alleviant, AstraZeneca, Axon, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, CVRx, Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Merck, Vascular Dynamics, Vectorious, and VWave; and has received grants from AstraZeneca. Dr Costanzo is a consultant for Abbott. Dr Zile has received research funding from Novartis; and has been a consultant for Novartis, Abbott, Boston Scientific, CVRx, EBR, Endotronix, Ironwood, Merck, Medtronic, and Myokardia V Wave. Dr Ducharme has received consulting fees from Abbott, Akcea, Alnylam, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, Pfizer, and Sanofi; and has received grants from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Corvia, Eidos, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, and Servier. Dr Troughton has received research grants from Health Research Council of New Zealand; has received consulting fees from Merck, Bayer, American Regent, and Roche Diagnostics; and has received honoraria payments from Roche Diagnostics. Drs Maisel and Paul are consultants for Abbott. Dr Mehra is a consultant for Natera, Paragonix, Moderna, Janssen, Broadview Ventures, Mesoblast, and Baim Institute for Clinical Research; is a consultant for Abbott; has served on the Clinical Events Committee for GUIDE-HF through the Baim Institute for Clinical Research; and has stock in NuPulseCV, Leviticus, Transmedics, and FineHeart. Dr Sears has received research grants from Medtronic and Zoll; is a consultant for Abbott, Medtronic, and Milestone Pharmaceutical; and has received personal fees from Medtronic and Zoll. Dr Smart has received research grants from Amgen; and is a consultant for Abbott. Dr Johnson, Mr Henderson, and Dr Adamson are full-time employees and shareholders for Abbott. Dr Desai has received institutional research grants from Abbott, Alnylam, AstraZeneca, Bayer, and Novartis; and is a consultant for Abbott, Alnylam, AstraZeneca, Axon Therapeutics, Avidity, Biofourmis, Boston Scientific, Cytokinetics, GlaxoSmithKline, Medpace, Merck, Novartis, Parexel, Regeneron, Roche, and Verily. Dr Abraham has received personal fees from Zoll Respicardia, Cardionomic, WhiteSwell, AquaPass, Cordio, Vectorious, Impulse Dynamics, and Edwards Lifesciences; and has personal equity in V-Wave Medica. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: The authors tested the hypothesis that physiological information from sensors within a minimally invasive, subcutaneous, insertable cardiac monitor (ICM) could be used to develop an ambulatory heart failure risk score (HFRS) to accurately identify heart failure (HF) patients, across the ejection fraction spectrum, at high risk of an impending worsening heart failure event (HFE)., Objectives: The purpose of this study was to examine performance of ICM-based, multiparameter, dynamic HFRS to predict HFEs in patients with NYHA functional class II/III HF., Methods: In 2 observational cohorts, HF patients were implanted with an ICM; subcutaneous impedance, respiratory rate, heart rate and variability, atrial fibrillation burden, ventricular rate during atrial fibrillation, and activity duration were combined into an HFRS to identify the probability of HFE within 30 days. Patients and providers were blinded to the data. HFRS sensitivity and unexplained detection rate were defined in 2 independent patient population data sets. HFEs were defined as hospitalization, observation unit, or emergency department visit with a primary diagnosis of HF, and intravenous diuretic treatment., Results: First data set (development): 42 patients had 19 HFE; second data set (validation): 94 patients had 19 HFE (mean age 66 ± 11 years, 63% men, 50% with LVEF ≥40%, 80% NYHA functional class III). Using a high-risk threshold = 7.5%, development and validation data sets: sensitivity was 73.7% and 68.4%; unexplained detection rate of 1.4 and 1.5 per patient-year; median 47 and 64 days early warning before HFE., Conclusions: ICM-HFRS provides a multiparameter, integrated diagnostic method with the ability to identify when HF patients are at increased risk of heart failure events. (Reveal LINQ Evaluation of Fluid [REEF]; NCT02275923, Reveal LINQ Heart Failure [LINQ HF]; NCT02758301, Algorithm Using LINQ Sensors for Evaluation and Treatment of Heart Failure [ALLEVIATE-HF]; NCT04452149)., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures This study was funded by Medtronic. Drs Zile, Kahwash, Mehra, Fonarow, Gulati, and Butler have served as consultants to Medtronic. Drs Sarkar, Koehler, and Zielinski are employees of Medtronic. Dr Mehra has received travel support and consulting fees, paid to Brigham and Women’s Hospital, from Abbott; fees for serving on a steering committee from Medtronic and Janssen (Johnson and Johnson); fees for serving on a data and safety monitoring board from Mesoblast; consulting fees from Natera, Paragonix, Moderna, the Baim Institute of Clinical Research, and Broadview Ventures; and fees for serving as a scientific board member from NuPulseCV, Leviticus, Transmedics and FineHeart. Dr Fonarow has served as a consultant for Abbott, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Cytokinetics, Eli Lilly, Johnson and Johnson, Medtronic, Merck, Novartis, and Pfizer. Dr Butler has served as a consultant for Abbott, American Regent, Amgen, Applied Therapeutic, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cardiac Dimension, Cardior, CVRx, Cytokinetics, Edwards, Element Science, Innolife, Impulse Dynamics, Imbria, Inventiva, Lexicon, Lilly, LivaNova, Janssen, Merck, Occlutech, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Pharmacosmos, Pharmain, Roche, Sequana, SQ Innovation, 3live, and Vifor., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Importance: Left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) enhance quality and duration of life in advanced heart failure. The burden of nonsurgical bleeding events is a leading morbidity. Aspirin as an antiplatelet agent is mandated along with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) with continuous-flow LVADs without conclusive evidence of efficacy and safety., Objective: To determine whether excluding aspirin as part of the antithrombotic regimen with a fully magnetically levitated LVAD is safe and decreases bleeding., Design, Setting, and Participants: This international, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of aspirin (100 mg/d) vs placebo with VKA therapy in patients with advanced heart failure with an LVAD was conducted across 51 centers with expertise in treating patients with advanced heart failure across 9 countries. The randomized population included 628 patients with advanced heart failure implanted with a fully magnetically levitated LVAD (314 in the placebo group and 314 in the aspirin group), of whom 296 patients in the placebo group and 293 in the aspirin group were in the primary analysis population, which informed the primary end point analysis. The study enrolled patients from July 2020 to September 2022; median follow-up was 14 months., Intervention: Patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive aspirin (100 mg/d) or placebo in addition to an antithrombotic regimen., Main Outcomes and Measures: The composite primary end point, assessed for noninferiority (-10% margin) of placebo, was survival free of a major nonsurgical (>14 days after implant) hemocompatibility-related adverse events (including stroke, pump thrombosis, major bleeding, or arterial peripheral thromboembolism) at 12 months. The principal secondary end point was nonsurgical bleeding events., Results: Of the 589 analyzed patients, 77% were men; one-third were Black and 61% were White. More patients were alive and free of hemocompatibility events at 12 months in the placebo group (74%) vs those taking aspirin (68%). Noninferiority of placebo was demonstrated (absolute between-group difference, 6.0% improvement in event-free survival with placebo [lower 1-sided 97.5% CI, -1.6%]; P < .001). Aspirin avoidance was associated with reduced nonsurgical bleeding events (relative risk, 0.66 [95% confidence limit, 0.51-0.85]; P = .002) with no increase in stroke or other thromboembolic events, a finding consistent among diverse subgroups of patient characteristics., Conclusions and Relevance: In patients with advanced heart failure treated with a fully magnetically levitated LVAD, avoidance of aspirin as part of an antithrombotic regimen, which includes VKA, is not inferior to a regimen containing aspirin, does not increase thromboembolism risk, and is associated with a reduction in bleeding events., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04069156.

Background: Left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) are underused among women with advanced heart failure, but reasons remain unclear. Outcomes in women compared with men with contemporary fully magnetically levitated LVADs remain uncertain., Objectives: The authors examined differences in characteristics, 2-year outcomes, and risk for key adverse events among women and men., Methods: In 2,200 HeartMate3 (HM3) (Abbott Cardiovascular) LVAD recipients in the MOMENTUM 3 study (Multicenter Study of MagLev Technology in Patients Undergoing Mechanical Circulatory Support Therapy with HeartMate 3), survival free of disabling stroke or reoperation to replace or remove a malfunctioning pump at 2 years was analyzed between women and men. Other outcomes included overall 2-year survival, adverse events, and functional measures., Results: Women comprised 20.4% (n = 448 of 2,200) of the study population and were younger, with nonischemic cardiomyopathy, and more often were Black persons compared with men. The primary endpoint (women 79.4% vs men 75.5% (adjusted [a]HR: 0.96 [95% CI: 0.75-1.24]; P = 0.66) or survival at 2 years (women 82.4% vs men 80.2%; aHR: 1.06 [95% CI: 0.81-1.40]; P = 0.66) was no different. Women had an increased rate of stroke (adjusted incidence rate ratio [aIRR]: 1.52 [95% CI: 1.09-2.11]; P = 0.012), major bleeding (aIRR: 1.28 [95% CI: 1.15-1.42]; P < 0.0001) and infection (aIRR 1.14 [95% CI: 1.03-1.55]; P = 0.01), but these differences were not seen among older (>65 years) patients. Both groups had similar gains in 6-minute walk distance and quality-of-life measurements., Conclusions: There were no differences in the primary composite endpoint or overall survival in women compared with men at 2 years of support. Reasons underlying increase in hemocompatibility-related events and infection-related morbidity in younger women deserves further study. (MOMENTUM 3 IDE [HM3], NCT02224755; MOMENTUM 3 Continued Access Protocol [MOMENTUM 3 CAP], NCT02892955)., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Both MOMENTUM 3 (Multicenter Study of MagLev Technology in Patients Undergoing Mechanical Circulatory Support Therapy With HeartMate 3) IDE (Investigational Device Exemption) and CAP (Continued Access Protocol) studies were sponsored by Abbott. Dr Cogswell has served on Speakers Bureau and as an advisory board member for Abbott and Medtronic; her spouse is an employee of Medtronic. Dr Ravichandran has served on Speakers Bureau for Abbott and Medtronic. Dr Cleveland has served as an advisory board member for Abbott and Medtronic. Dr Mehra has received consulting fees from Abbott, paid to Brigham and Women’s Hospital; has served as steering committee member for Medtronic and Janssen (Johnson and Johnson); has served on the data and safety monitoring board for Mesoblast; has served as a consultant for Natera, Paragonix, Transmedics, Moderna, Baim Institute of Clinical Research, and Broadview Ventures; and has served as a scientific board member for NuPulseCV, Leviticus, and FineHeart. Dr Goldstein has served as a consultant and as an advisory board member for Abbott and Abiomed. Dr Uriel is on the medical advisory board for Livemetric, Revamp, and Leviticus; and has received grants from Abbott, Abiomed, and Fire. Nicholas Dirckx and Dr Ahmed are employed by Abbott. Dr Yuzefpolskaya has served on Speakers Bureau for Abbott; and has received an educational grant from Abbott. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2023 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Correction of valvular disease is often undertaken during left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation with uncertain benefit. We analyzed clinical outcomes with HeartMate 3 (HM3; Abbott) LVAD implantation in those with various concurrent valve procedures (HM3+VP) with those with an isolated LVAD implant (HM3 alone)., Methods: The study included 2200 patients with HM3 implanted within the Multicenter Study of MagLev Technology in Patients Undergoing Mechanical Circulatory Support Therapy with HeartMate 3 (MOMENTUM 3) trial portfolio who underwent 820 concurrent procedures among which 466 (21.8%) were HM3+VP. VPs included 101 aortic, 61 mitral, 163 tricuspid; 85 patients had multiple VPs. Perioperative complications, major adverse events, and survival were analyzed., Results: Patients who underwent HM3+VP had higher-acuity Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support (INTERMACS) profiles (1-2: 41% vs 31%) compared with no VPs (P < .05). The cardiopulmonary bypass time (124 vs 76 minutes; P < .0001) and hospital length of stay (20 vs 18 days; P < .0001) were longer in HM3+VP. A higher incidence of stroke (4.9% vs 2.4%), bleeding (33.9% vs 23.8%), and right heart failure (41.5% vs 29.6%) was noted in HM3+VP at 0 to 30 days (P < .01), with no difference in 30-day mortality (3.9% vs 3.3%) or 2-year survival (81.7% vs 80.8%). Analysis of individual VP showed no differences in survival compared to HM3 alone. No differences were noted among patients with either significant mitral (moderate or worse) or tricuspid (moderate or worse) regurgitation with or without corrective surgery., Conclusions: Concurrent VPs, commonly performed during LVAD implantation, are associated with increased morbidity during the index hospitalization, with no effect on short- and long-term survival. There is sufficient equipoise to consider a randomized trial on the benefit of commonly performed VPs (such as mitral or tricuspid regurgitation correction), during LVAD implantation., (Copyright © 2022 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: In advanced heart failure patients implanted with a fully magnetically levitated HeartMate 3 (HM3, Abbott) left ventricular assist device (LVAD), it is unknown how preimplant factors and postimplant index hospitalization events influence 5-year mortality in those able to be discharged., Objectives: The goal was to identify risk predictors of mortality through 5 years among HM3 LVAD recipients conditional on discharge from index hospitalization in the MOMENTUM 3 pivotal trial., Methods: This analysis evaluated 485 of 515 (94%) patients discharged after implantation of the HM3 LVAD. Preimplant (baseline), implant surgery, and index hospitalization characteristics were analyzed individually, and as multivariable predictors for mortality risk through 5 years., Results: Cumulative 5-year mortality in the cohort (median age: 62 years, 80% male, 65% White, 61% destination therapy due to transplant ineligibility) was 38%. Two preimplant characteristics (elevated blood urea nitrogen and prior coronary artery bypass graft or valve procedure) and 3 postimplant characteristics (hemocompatibility-related adverse events, ventricular arrhythmias, and estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 mL/min/1.73 m 2 at discharge) were predictors of 5-year mortality. In 171 of 485 patients (35.3%) without any risk predictors, 5-year mortality was reduced to 22.6% (95% CI: 15.4%-32.7%). Even among those with 1 or more predictors, mortality was <50% at 5 years (45.7% [95% CI: 39.0%-52.8%])., Conclusions: Long-term survival in successfully discharged HM3 LVAD recipients is largely influenced by clinical events experienced during the index surgical hospitalization in tandem with baseline factors, with mortality of <50% at 5 years. In patients without identified predictors of risk, long-term 5-year mortality is low and rivals that achieved with heart transplantation, even though most were implanted with destination therapy intent. (MOMENTUM 3 IDE Clinical Study Protocol, NCT02224755; MOMENTUM 3 Pivotal Cohort Extended Follow-up PAS, NCT03982979)., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures This study was sponsored by Abbott. The sponsor had a role in design of the study, selection of centers, data collection, and analyzing study data. The decisions on manuscript development and submission were within the primary purview of the academic investigators. The manuscript writing, revision, and decision to submit for publication were driven by the trial publications and presentation committee. The sponsor did not control the decision to which journal the manuscript was submitted. The sponsor approved the manuscript prior to submission. The manuscript was written and reviewed by the authors. The sponsor assisted with all data requests under the direction of the first and corresponding author. Dr Hall is a consultant/advisory board member for Abbott, Abiomed, Evaheart, CareDx, and Natera. Dr Uriel is on the advisory board for Livemetric, Revamp, and Leviticus; and has received grant support from Abbott, Abiomed, and Fire1. Dr Goldstein has served as a medical advisory board member for Abbott; and has served as a consultant for Abbott and Abiomed. Dr Cleveland has served as a Clinical Events Committee and Data and Safety Monitoring Board member for Abbott Studies. Dr Cowger has served as a consultant for Abbott, Medtronic, Bioventrix, Endotronix, and Procyrion; and has received grant support and speaker fees from Abbott. Dr Salerno has received personal fees from Abbott and Medtronic. Dr Naka has received personal fees from Abbott. Dr Horstmanshof has served as a consultant for Abbott. Dr Crandall and Ms Wang are employees of Abbott. Dr Mehra has received payment made to institution from Abbott for consulting; has received consulting fees from Mesoblast, Janssen, Moderna, Paragonix, and Baim Institute for Clinical Research; and has served as an advisory board member for Transmedics, NuPulseCV, Leviticus, and FineHeart., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: COMMANDER-HF was a randomised trial comparing rivaroxaban 2.5 mg two times a day to placebo, in addition to antiplatelet therapy, in patients hospitalised for worsening heart failure with coronary artery disease and sinus rhythm. Patients with diabetes are at increased risk of cardiovascular events and therefore have more to gain., Methods and Results: In this post-hoc analysis, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban in patients with (n=2052) and without diabetes (n=2970). The primary outcome was the composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction (MI) or ischaemic stroke. HRs and 95% CIs with interaction analyses were used to describe event-rates and treatment effects. Patients with diabetes had a higher prevalence of cardiovascular comorbidities (eg, hypertension, obesity) and increased incidence of cardiovascular events. Adjusted HRs for events in people with versus without diabetes were 1.34 (95% CI 1.19 to 1.50) for the primary outcome, 1.21 (95% CI 0.84 to 1.75) for stroke, 1.51 (95% CI 1.14 to 1.99) for MI, 1.17 (95% CI 1.05 to 1.31) for heart failure hospitalisation and 1.06 (95% CI 0.56 to 2.01) for major bleeding. Rivaroxaban had no significant effect on event-rates in patients with and without diabetes (all interaction p values >0.05). Low-dose rivaroxaban was associated with an overall reduction in ischaemic stroke (HR 0.66; 95% CI 0.47 to 0.95), with no apparent subgroup interaction according to diabetes status (p-int=0.93)., Conclusions: In COMMANDER-HF a diagnosis of diabetes conferred higher rates of cardiovascular events that, with exception of ischaemic stroke, was not substantially reduced by rivaroxaban. Rivaroxaban was associated with reduced risk of ischaemic stroke for patients with and without diabetes., Trial Registration Number: NCT01877915; Post-results., Competing Interests: Competing interests: AS has received funding from the FRSQ-Junior 1 scholars’ program, Bayer-Canadian Cardiovascular Society, Alberta Innovates Health Solution, Roche Diagnostics, Novartis, Takeda, Boehringer- Ingelheim, and Akcea. CSPL is supported by a Clinician Scientist Award from the National Medical Research Council of Singapore; has received research support from Bayer and Roche Diagnostics; has served as consultant or on the Advisory Board/ Steering Committee/Executive Committee for Abbott, Actelion, Allysta Pharma, Amgen, AnaCardio AB, Applied Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Cytokinetics, Darma, EchoNous, Impulse Dynamics, Ionis Pharmaceutical, Janssen Research & Development LLC, Medscape/WebMD Global LLC, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Prosciento, Radcliffe Group Ltd., Roche Diagnostics, Sanofi, Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics and Us2.ai; and serves as cofounder and non-executive director of Us2.ai. MRM reports payments made to his institution from Abbott for consulting, consulting fees from Janssen, Mesoblast, Broadview Ventures, Natera, Paragonix, Moderna and Baim Institute for Clinical Research; he is a scientific advisory board member for NuPulseCV, Leviticus and FineHeart. JC reports research funding from Bayer to his institution and personal honoraria for advisory boards from Bayer and honoraria for steering committees from Janssen., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Globalization in Asia and consequent strengthening of healthcare economic factors in tandem with an increasing heart failure (HF) population have enhanced potential for development and progress in the fields of HF medicine and mechanical circulatory support (MCS). In Japan, there are unique opportunities to investigate the outcome of acute and chronic MCS and a national registry for percutaneous and implantable left ventricular assist device (LVAD) including Impella pumps has been established. A Peripheral extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) for acute MCS has been used in more than 7000 patients annually and Impella usage in more than 4000 patients over the past 4 years was noted. Recently, a novel centrifugal pump with hydrodynamically levitated impeller was developed and approved for mid-term extracorporeal circulatory support. In terms of chronic MCS more than 1200 continuous flow LVADs have been implanted during the past decade, and 2-year survival rate after primary LVAD implantation is 91%. Because of donor organ shortage, more than 70% of heart transplant recipients required LVAD support for more than 3 years and prevention and treatment of complications during long-term LVAD support have become important. Five important topics including hemocompatibility-related complications, LVAD infections, aortic valve insufficiency, right ventricular failure and cardiac recovery during LVAD support are discussed in this review for improving clinical outcomes. Findings from Japan will continue to provide useful information regarding MCS for the Asia-Pacific region and beyond., (© 2023 International Center for Artificial Organ and Transplantation (ICAOT) and Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background: In patients with symptomatic heart failure (HF) and previous heart failure hospitalization (HFH), hemodynamic-guided HF management using a wireless pulmonary artery pressure (PAP) sensor reduces HFH, but it is unclear whether these benefits extend to patients who have not been recently hospitalized but remain at risk because of elevated natriuretic peptides (NPs)., Objectives: This study assessed the efficacy and safety of hemodynamic-guided HF management in patients with elevated NPs but no recent HFH., Methods: In the GUIDE-HF (Hemodynamic-Guided Management of Heart Failure) trial, 1,000 patients with New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class II to IV HF and either previous HFH or elevated NP levels were randomly assigned to hemodynamic-guided HF management or usual care. The authors evaluated the primary study composite of all-cause mortality and total HF events at 12 months according to treatment assignment and enrollment stratum (HFH vs elevated NPs) by using Cox proportional hazards models., Results: Of 999 evaluable patients, 557 were enrolled on the basis of a previous HFH and 442 on the basis of elevated NPs alone. Those patients enrolled by NP criteria were older and more commonly White persons with lower body mass index, lower NYHA class, less diabetes, more atrial fibrillation, and lower baseline PAP. Event rates were lower among those patients in the NP group for both the full follow-up (40.9 per 100 patient-years vs 82.0 per 100 patient-years) and the pre-COVID-19 analysis (43.6 per 100 patient-years vs 88.0 per 100 patient-years). The effects of hemodynamic monitoring were consistent across enrollment strata for the primary endpoint over the full study duration (interaction P = 0.71) and the pre-COVID-19 analysis (interaction P = 0.58)., Conclusions: Consistent effects of hemodynamic-guided HF management across enrollment strata in GUIDE-HF support consideration of hemodynamic monitoring in the expanded group of patients with chronic HF and elevated NPs without recent HFH. (Hemodynamic-Guided Management of Heart Failure [GUIDE-HF]; NCT03387813)., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures The GUIDE-HF trial was funded by Abbott. Dr Desai has received institutional research grants from Abbott, Alnylam, AstraZeneca, Bayer, and Novartis; and is a consultant for Abbott, Alnylam, AstraZeneca, Axon Therapeutics, Avidity, Biofourmis, Boston Scientific, Cytokinetics, GlaxoSmithKline, Medpace, Merck, Novartis, Parexel, Regeneron, Roche, and Verily. Dr Maisel has been a consultant to Abbott. Dr Mehra is a consultant for Abbott, Natera, Paragonix, Moderna, Janssen, Broadview Ventures, Mesoblast, and Baim Institute for Clinical Research; has served on the Clinical Events Committee for GUIDE-HF through the Baim Institute for Clinical Research; and holds stock in NuPulseCV, Leviticus, and FineHeart. Dr Zile has been a consultant for Abbott. Dr Ducharme has been a consultant for Abbott. Dr Paul has been a consultant for Abbott. Dr Sears has received research grants from Medtronic and Zoll; is a consultant for Abbott, Medtronic, and Milestone Pharmaceutical; and has received personal fees from Medtronic and Zoll. Dr Smart has received research grants from Amgen; and is a consultant for Abbott. Mr Henderson is employed by Abbott. Dr Johnson is employed by Abbott. Dr Adamson is employed by Abbott. Dr Costanzo has been a consultant for Abbott. Dr Lindenfeld has received research grants from AstraZeneca, Sensible Medical, and Volumetrix; and is a consultant for Abbott, Alleviant Medical, AstraZeneca, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, CVRx, Edwards Lifesciences, Impulse Dynamics, and V-Wave. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Body wasting in patients with cancer can affect the heart., Objectives: The frequency, extent, and clinical and prognostic importance of cardiac wasting in cancer patients is unknown., Methods: This study prospectively enrolled 300 patients with mostly advanced, active cancer but without significant cardiovascular disease or infection. These patients were compared with 60 healthy control subjects and 60 patients with chronic heart failure (ejection fraction <40%) of similar age and sex distribution., Results: Cancer patients presented with lower left ventricular (LV) mass than healthy control subjects or heart failure patients (assessed by transthoracic echocardiography: 177 ± 47 g vs 203 ± 64 g vs 300 ± 71 g, respectively; P < 0.001). LV mass was lowest in cancer patients with cachexia (153 ± 42 g; P < 0.001). Importantly, the presence of low LV mass was independent of previous cardiotoxic anticancer therapy. In 90 cancer patients with a second echocardiogram after 122 ± 71 days, LV mass had declined by 9.3% ± 1.4% (P < 0.001). In cancer patients with cardiac wasting during follow-up, stroke volume decreased (P < 0.001) and resting heart rate increased over time (P = 0.001). During follow-up of on average 16 months, 149 patients died (1-year all-cause mortality 43%; 95% CI: 37%-49%). LV mass and LV mass adjusted for height squared were independent prognostic markers (both P < 0.05). Adjustment of LV mass for body surface area masked the observed survival impact. LV mass below the prognostically relevant cutpoints in cancer was associated with reduced overall functional status and lower physical performance., Conclusions: Low LV mass is associated with poor functional status and increased all-cause mortality in cancer. These findings provide clinical evidence of cardiac wasting-associated cardiomyopathy in cancer., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures This study was partly funded by the German Centre for Cardiovascular Research through research support to Dr Hadzibegovic, Dr S. Anker, and Dr M. Anker. Dr Wilkenshoff is supported by a Clinical Fellowship Grant from the Berlin Institute of Health; and has received speaker fees and/or contributions to congresses from Abbott, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Berlin Chemie, Bristol Myers Squibb, GE Healthcare, Pfizer, Philips, and Servier, all outside the submitted work. Dr Zeller has received support from the German Centre for Cardiovascular Research (FKZ 81Z1710101 and FKZ 81Z0710102). Dr Karakas is supported by a Clinician Scientist Professorship Grant from the Else Kroener-Fresenius-Foundation; and has received personal fees and grant support from Daiichi-Sankyo, Adrenomed, Sphingotec, and Vifor Pharma, all outside the submitted work. Dr Keller has served on advisory boards for Roche, Janssen-Cilag, Celgene, Takeda, Bristol Myers Squibb, Gilead, Hexal, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, and Pentixapharm; has received clinical research support from Janssen-Cilag, Novartis, Takeda, Bristol Myers Squibb, Roche, and Pfizer; and has received travel support from Roche, Bristol Myers Squibb, Gilead, Takeda, Janssen-Cilag, and Celgene. Dr Bullinger has received honoraria from AbbVie, Amgen, Astellas, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Daiichi-Sankyo, Gilead, Hexal, Janssen, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Menarini, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, and Seattle Genetics; and has received research support from Bayer and Jazz Pharmaceuticals. Dr Lyon has received support from the Fondation Leducq Transatlantic Network of Excellence in Cardio-Oncology; and has received speaker, advisory board, or consulting fees and/or research grants from Pfizer, Novartis, Servier, Amgen, Takeda, Roche, Janssens-Cilag, Clinigen, Eli Lilly, Eisai, Bristol Myers Squibb, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Boehringer Ingelheim, Myocardial Solutions, iOWNA Health, and Heartfelt Technologies. Dr Lüscher has received educational and research grants from Abbott, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi-Sankyo, Novartis, Sanofi, Servier, and Vifor; and has received consulting honoraria from Amgen, COR2ED, Daiichi-Sankyo, and Pfizer, outside this work. Dr Totzeck has received honoraria, lecture fees, and grant support from Edwards Lifesciences, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Novartis, Berlin Chemie, and Daiicho-Sankyo, all unrelated to this work. Dr Rassaf has received honoraria, lecture fees, and grant support from Edwards Lifesciences, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Novartis, Berlin Chemie, Daiicho-Sankyo, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novo Nordisk, Cardiac Dimensions, and Pfizer, all unrelated to this work. Dr Burkhoff has received consulting fees from AquaPass, Axon Medical, BioMind, CardioDyme, Corvia Medical, IMPULSE Dynamics, Orchestra Biomedical, PVLoops, and Zoll, all unrelated to the present work. Dr Mehra has received payments from Abbott to his institution for consulting; has received consulting fees from Janssen, Mesoblast, Broadview Ventures, Natera, Paragonix, Moderna, and Baim Institute for Clinical Research; and serves on the advisory board of NuPulseCV, Leviticus, Transmedics, and FineHeart. Dr Bax has received unrestricted research grants to his institution from Edwards Lifesciences, Abbott, Medtronic, Biotronik, and Boston Scientific; and has received personal speaker fees from Abbott and Edwards Lifesciences. Dr Butler has received personal fees from Abbott, Adrenomed, Amgen, Array, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, CVRx, G3 Pharmaceutical, Impulse Dynamics, Innolife, Janssen, LivaNova, Luitpold, Medtronic, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Roche, and Vifor. Dr S. Anker has received grants and personal fees from Vifor and Abbott Vascular; and has received personal fees for consulting, trial committee work, and/or lectures from Actimed, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bioventrix, Brahms, Cardiac Dimensions, Cardior, Cordio, CVRx, Edwards Lifesciences, Faraday, Impulse Dynamics, Janssen, Novartis, Occlutech, Pfizer, Respicardia, Servier, Vectorious, and V-Wave, all outside the submitted work; and is named co-inventor of 2 patent applications regarding MR-proANP (DE 102007010834 & DE 102007022367), but does not benefit personally from the related issued patents. Dr Packer has served as a consultant for AbbVie, Actavis, Amarin, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Caladrius, Casana, CSL Behring, Cytokinetics, Imara, Eli Lilly, Moderna, Novartis, Reata, Relypsa, and Salamandra. Dr Coats has received honoraria and/or speaker fees from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Menarini, Novartis, Servier, Vifor, Abbott, Actimed, Arena, Cardiac Dimensions, Corvia, CVRx, Enopace, ESN Cleer, Faraday, Impulse Dynamics, Respicardia, and Viatris. Dr von Haehling has received consulting fees and/or honoraria from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Brahms, Chugai, Grünenthal, Helsinn, Hexal, Novartis, Pharmacosmos, Respicardia, Roche, Servier, Sorin, and Vifor; and has received research support from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Innovative Medicines Initiative, and the German Centre for Cardiovascular Research. Dr Landmesser has received institutional research grants from Amgen, Bayer, and Novartis; and has received speaker or consulting honoraria from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer, Amgen, Sanofi, Novartis, and Novo Nordisk. Dr M. Anker has received personal fees from Servier, outside the submitted work. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

This clinical consensus statement reviews the use of inotropic support in patients with advanced heart failure. The current guidelines only support use of inotropes in the setting of acute decompensated heart failure with evidence of organ malperfusion or shock. However, inotropic support may be reasonable in other patients with advanced heart failure without acute severe decompensation. The clinical evidence supporting use of inotropes in these situations is reviewed. Particularly, patients with persistent congestion, systemic hypoperfusion, or advanced heart failure with need for palliation, and specific situations relevant to implantation of left ventricular assist devices or heart transplantation are discussed. Traditional and novel drugs with inotropic effects are discussed and use of guideline-directed therapy during inotropic support is reviewed. Finally, home inotropic therapy is described, and palliative care and end-of-life aspects are reviewed in relation to management of ongoing inotropic support (including guidance for maintenance and weaning of chronic inotropic therapy support)., (© 2023 The Authors. European Journal of Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Competing Interests: Disclosure: T.D.B., G.S., J.L.V., and H.K.S. do not have any conflict of interest to disclose with respect to this work. M.R.M. has received consulting fees from Abbott Medtronic, Janssen (a division of Johnson and Johnson), Natera, Baim Institute for Clinical Research, and Paragonix, participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for Mesoblast, and reports holding stock or stock options in NupulseCV, Leviticus, and Fineheart.

Aims: We assessed the incidence, predictors and clinical correlates of de-novo aortic regurgitation (AR), which physiologically reduces left ventricular assist device (LVAD) effectiveness due to recirculation syndrome, in the MOMENTUM 3 trial portfolio of the fully magnetically levitated HeartMate 3 (HM3) pump using the randomized pivotal trial (PT) and post-trial continued access protocol (CAP)., Methods and Results: De-novo aortic regurgitation incidence at 2 years was analysed in the randomized PT and validated in the first 1000 implanted patients of the CAP. Patients with concomitant/prior aortic valve surgery or without baseline or post-implant echocardiograms were excluded from this analysis. AR severity was assessed qualitatively by site-adjudicated echocardiograms (significant AR was defined as moderate or severe grade on echocardiogram). Of 1028 patients enrolled in the PT, 918 were eligible for inclusion in this analysis (HM3, n = 465; HMII, n = 453). At 2 years of LVAD support, freedom from significant AR was greater in the HM3 (92%) than HMII (82%) (hazard ratio 0.45, 95% confidence interval 0.27-0.75, p < 0.01). Of 907 HM3 patients analysed from the first 1000 implanted CAP patients, the rate of freedom from significant AR was 90%, consistent with the PT (p = 0.3). In the combined HM3 group (n = 1372), multivariable Cox modelling identified increasing age and female sex as significant predictors. Survival free of urgent transplant or AR corrective procedure was similar between HM3 patients with and without significant de-novo AR., Conclusions: The development of moderate or severe grade de-novo AR is reduced with the fully magnetically levitated HM3 LVAD compared to the axial-flow HMII pump. The occurrence of significant de-novo AR with the HM3 pump is not associated with a worse outcome at 2 years of follow-up., (© 2022 European Society of Cardiology.)

Background: Clinical trials inform on average efficacy, but individualized risk assessments for outcome prediction are important in guiding treatment implementation., Objectives: The authors developed and validated a patient-specific risk score to predict survival at 1 and 2 years after HeartMate 3 (HM3) left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation., Methods: The MOMENTUM 3 (Multicenter Study of MagLev Technology in Patients Undergoing Mechanical Circulatory Support Therapy with HeartMate 3) trial includes 2,200 HM3 LVAD patients in the pivotal trial and Continued Access Protocol study (2014-2018). The authors randomly assigned all patients to a derivation cohort (n = 1,540) or validation cohort (n = 660). Univariate mortality predictors were screened for potential model inclusion, stepwise selection was used to build the multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression model, and performance (discrimination and calibration) was evaluated., Results: Age, prior cardiac surgery (coronary artery bypass grafting [CABG] or valve procedure), lower serum sodium, higher blood urea nitrogen (BUN), small left ventricular size, and right atrial pressure-to-pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (RAP/PCWP) ratio >0.6 were significant risk factors for mortality. Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) analysis in the validation cohort demonstrated an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.76 (95% CI: 0.70-0.81) at 1 year and 0.71 (95% CI: 0.66-0.77) at 2 years. Calibration between predicted and observed survival of the risk quintiles was high, with Pearson correlation coefficients of 0.986 and 0.994 at 1 and 2 years, respectively. Patients were successfully stratified into tertiles with higher-than-average, average, and lower-than-average survival, and observed mortality risk increased by 2-fold from one tertile to the next., Conclusions: A practical, easy-to-use HM3 Survival Risk Score with 6 components was developed to accurately predict 1- and 2-year survival after HM3 LVAD implantation. The survival risk score can be used to provide individual survival estimates to facilitate shared decision making when considering HM3 LVAD therapy. (MOMENTUM 3 Trial Portfolio; NCT02224755, NCT02892955)., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures The MOMENTUM 3 trial portfolio (NCT02224755, NCT02892955) was funded by Abbott. Dr Mehra has received travel support and consulting fees, paid to Brigham and Women’s Hospital, from Abbott; fees for serving on a steering committee from Medtronic and Janssen (Johnson & Johnson); fees for serving on a data and safety monitoring board from Mesoblast; consulting fees from Natera, Paragonix, Moderna, the Baim Institute of Clinical Research, and Broadview Ventures; and fees for serving as a scientific board member from NuPulseCV, Leviticus, and FineHeart. Dr Morris has received research support from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, the Woodruff Foundation, and the Association of Black Cardiologists; and served as a consultant for Acorai, Boehringer Ingelheim Lilly, Cytokinetics, and Ionis. Dr Lanfear has served as a consultant for Abbott Laboratories, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Cytokinetics, DCRI (Novartis), Illumina, Janssen, Martin Pharmaceuticals, Otsuka, and Vicardia; and participated in clinical research for Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Critical Diagnostics, Lilly, Janssen, and Somalogic. Dr Desai has received consulting fees from Abbott. Dr Bansal has served on the advisory board for Abbott, Abiomed, TandemLife, and VADovations; as a proctor for Abbott; and as a consultant for Abbott, Abiomed, and TandemLife. Dr Cesar Guerrero-Miranda has served as a consultant for Abbott. Dr Hall has served as a consultant or advisory board member for Abbott, Abiomed, Medtronic, CareDx, and Natera. Dr Cleveland has served on the clinical events committee for Abbott. Dr Goldstein has served on the medical advisory board for Abbott and as a consultant for Abbott and Abiomed. Dr Uriel has served on the medical advisory board for Livemetric and Levitcus. Dr Chen has served as a consultant for Abbott. Co-authors Heatley and Chuang are Abbott employees. Dr Estep has received consulting fees from Abbott and Medtronic paid to his institution. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Hemodynamically-guided management using an implanted pulmonary artery pressure sensor is indicated to reduce heart failure (HF) hospitalizations in patients with New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class II-III with a prior HF hospitalization or those with elevated natriuretic peptides., Objectives: The authors sought to evaluate the effect of left ventricular ejection fraction (EF) on treatment outcomes in the GUIDE-HF (Hemodynamic-GUIDEd management of Heart Failure) randomized trial., Methods: The GUIDE-HF randomized arm included 1,000 NYHA functional class II-IV patients (with HF hospitalization within the prior 12 months or elevated natriuretic peptides adjusted for EF and body mass index) implanted with a pulmonary artery pressure sensor, randomized 1:1 to a hemodynamically-guided management group (treatment) or a control group (control). The primary endpoint was the composite of HF hospitalizations, urgent HF visits, and all-cause mortality at 12 months. The authors assessed outcomes by EF in guideline-defined subgroups ≤40%, 41%-49%, and ≥50%, within the trial specified pre-COVID-19 period cohort., Results: There were 177 primary events (0.553/patient-year) in the treatment group and 224 events (0.682/patient-year) in the control group (HR: 0.81 [95% CI: 0.66-1.00]; P = 0.049); HF hospitalization was lower in the treatment vs control group (HR: 0.72 [95% CI: 0.57-0.92]; P = 0.0072). Within each EF subgroup, primary endpoint and HF hospitalization rates were lower in the treatment group (HR <1.0 across the EF spectrum). Event rate reduction by EF in the treatment groups was correlated with reduction in pulmonary artery pressures and medication changes., Conclusions: Hemodynamically-guided HF management decreases HF-related endpoints across the EF spectrum in an expanded patient population of patients with HF. (Hemodynamic-GUIDEd Management of Heart Failure [GUIDE-HF]; NCT03387813)., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Funding was provided by Abbott. The authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Outcomes in patients with smaller body size after HeartMate 3 left ventricular assist device (HM3) implantation are not well characterized. We sought to evaluate outcomes in smaller vs larger body surface area (BSA) patients in the MOMENTUM 3 pivotal trial and its Continued Access Protocol cohort., Methods: The analysis cohort included 1015 HM3 patients divided into 2 groups: BSA ≤1.70 m 2 (small patients, n = 82) and BSA >1.70 m 2 (large patients, n = 933). The composite primary end point was survival at 2 years free of disabling stroke or reoperation to replace or to remove a malfunctioning device. Adverse events were compared between groups., Results: Smaller patients were more frequently women (56.1% vs 17.7%; P < .001) and had lower prevalence of diabetes (28.1% vs 43.9%; P = .005) and hypertension (51.2% vs 71.9%; P < .001), larger median indexed LVEDD (normalized by BSA, 40 vs 33 mm/m 2 ; P < .001), and lower median serum creatinine concentration (1.1 vs 1.3 mg/dL; P < .001). The proportion of patients achieving the composite end point at 2 years was 77% in both groups (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.68-1.91; P = .62). Two-year adverse event rates were also similar between groups except for sepsis (6.1% vs 14.9%; P = .029) and cardiac arrhythmias (24.4% vs 35.3%; P = .005), which were higher in the larger patients., Conclusions: Outcomes after HM3 implantation were comparable between small and large patients. Smaller body size should not be used to deny HM3 implantation in patients who are otherwise suitable candidates for durable mechanical circulatory support., (Copyright © 2022 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Importance: Although durable left ventricular assist device (LVAD) therapy has emerged as an important treatment option for patients with advanced heart failure refractory to pharmacological support, outcomes, including survival, beyond 2 years remain poorly characterized., Objective: To report the composite end point of survival to transplant, recovery, or LVAD support free of debilitating stroke (Modified Rankin Scale score >3) or reoperation to replace the pump 5 years after the implant in participants who received the fully magnetically levitated centrifugal-flow HeartMate 3 or axial-flow HeartMate II LVAD in the MOMENTUM 3 randomized trial and were still receiving LVAD therapy at the 2-year follow-up., Design, Setting, and Participants: This observational study was a 5-year follow-up of the MOMENTUM 3 trial, conducted in 69 US centers, that demonstrated superiority of the centrifugal-flow LVAD to the axial-flow pump with respect to survival to transplant, recovery, or LVAD support free of debilitating stroke or reoperation to replace the pump at 2 years. A total of 295 patients were enrolled between June 2019 to April 2021 in the extended-phase study, with 5-year follow-up completed in September 2021., Exposures: Of 1020 patients in the investigational device exemption per-protocol population, 536 were still receiving LVAD support at 2 years, of whom 289 received the centrifugal-flow pump and 247 received the axial-flow pump., Main Outcomes and Measures: There were 10 end points evaluated at 5 years in the per-protocol population, including a composite of survival to transplant, recovery, or LVAD support free of debilitating stroke or reoperation to replace the pump between the centrifugal-flow and axial-flow pump groups and overall survival between the 2 groups., Results: A total of 477 patients (295 enrolled and 182 provided limited data) of 536 patients still receiving LVAD support at 2 years contributed to the extended-phase analysis (median age, 62 y; 86 [18%] women). The 5-year Kaplan-Meier estimate of survival to transplant, recovery, or LVAD support free of debilitating stroke or reoperation to replace the pump in the centrifugal-flow vs axial-flow group was 54.0% vs 29.7% (hazard ratio, 0.55 [95% CI, 0.45-0.67]; P < .001). Overall Kaplan-Meier survival was 58.4% in the centrifugal-flow group vs 43.7% in the axial-flow group (hazard ratio, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.58-0.89]; P = .003). Serious adverse events of stroke, bleeding, and pump thrombosis were less frequent in the centrifugal-flow pump group., Conclusions and Relevance: In this observational follow-up study of patients from the MOMENTUM 3 randomized trial, per-protocol analyses found that receipt of a fully magnetically levitated centrifugal-flow LVAD vs axial-flow LVAD was associated with a better composite outcome and higher likelihood of overall survival at 5 years. These findings support the use of the fully magnetically levitated LVAD., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02224755 and NCT03982979.

Aims: During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, important changes in heart failure (HF) event rates have been widely reported, but few data address potential causes for these changes; several possibilities were examined in the GUIDE-HF study., Methods and Results: From 15 March 2018 to 20 December 2019, patients were randomized to haemodynamic-guided management (treatment) vs. control for 12 months, with a primary endpoint of all-cause mortality plus HF events. Pre-COVID-19, the primary endpoint rate was 0.553 vs. 0.682 events/patient-year in the treatment vs. control group [hazard ratio (HR) 0.81, P = 0.049]. Treatment difference was no longer evident during COVID-19 (HR 1.11, P = 0.526), with a 21% decrease in the control group (0.536 events/patient-year) and no change in the treatment group (0.597 events/patient-year). Data reflecting provider-, disease-, and patient-dependent factors that might change the primary endpoint rate during COVID-19 were examined. Subject contact frequency was similar in the treatment vs. control group before and during COVID-19. During COVID-19, the monthly rate of medication changes fell 19.2% in the treatment vs. 10.7% in the control group to levels not different between groups (P = 0.362). COVID-19 was infrequent and not different between groups. Pulmonary artery pressure area under the curve decreased -98 mmHg-days in the treatment group vs. -100 mmHg-days in the controls (P = 0.867). Patient compliance with the study protocol was maintained during COVID-19 in both groups., Conclusion: During COVID-19, the primary event rate decreased in the controls and remained low in the treatment group, resulting in an effacement of group differences that were present pre-COVID-19. These outcomes did not result from changes in provider- or disease-dependent factors; pulmonary artery pressure decreased despite fewer medication changes, suggesting that patient-dependent factors played an important role in these outcomes. Clinical Trials.gov: NCT03387813., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: In the MOMENTUM 3 (Multicenter Study of MagLev Technology in Patients Undergoing Mechanical Circulatory Support Therapy with HeartMate 3) pivotal trial, the HeartMate 3 (HM3) fully magnetically levitated left ventricular assist device (LVAD) demonstrated superiority over the axial-flow HeartMate II (HMII) LVAD. The patterns and predictors of hospitalizations with the HM3 LVAD have not been characterized., Objectives: This study sought to determine causes, predictors, and impact of hospitalizations during LVAD support., Methods: Patients discharged after LVAD implantation were analyzed. In the pivotal trial, 485 recipients of HM3 were compared with 471 recipients of HMII. The pivotal trial HM3 group was also compared to 949 recipients of HM3 in the postapproval phase within the trial portfolio. Predictors of cause-specific rehospitalization were analyzed., Results: The rates of rehospitalization were lower with HM3 LVAD than with HMII LVAD in the pivotal trial (225.7 vs 246.4 events per 100 patient-years; P < 0.05). Overall, rehospitalization rates and duration were similar in the HM3 postapproval phase and pivotal trial but prolonged hospitalizations (>7 days) were less frequent (rate ratio: 0.90 [95% CI: 0.80-0.98]; P < 0.05). In HM3 recipients, the most frequent causes of rehospitalization included infection, heart failure (HF)-related events, and bleeding. First rehospitalization caused by HF-related event versus other causes was associated with reduced survival (HR: 2.2 [95% CI: 1.3-3.9]; P = 0.0014). Male sex, non-White race, presence of cardiac resynchronization therapy/implantable cardioverter-defibrillator, obesity, higher right atrial pressure, smaller LV size, longer duration of index hospitalization, and lower estimated glomerular filtration rate at index discharge predicted HF hospitalizations., Conclusions: Contemporary support with the HM3 fully magnetically levitated LVAD is associated with a lower hospitalization burden than with prior pumps; however, rehospitalizations for infection, HF, and bleeding remain important challenges for progress in the patient journey. (MOMENTUM 3 IDE Clinical Study, NCT02224755; MOMENTUM 3 Continued Access Protocol [MOMENTUM 3 CAP], NCT02892955)., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures The MOMENTUM 3 pivotal trial (NCT02224755) and CAP study (NCT02892955) were sponsored by Abbott. Dr Vidula has received research grants from the National Institutes of Health (NIH 1R01HL155201-01) and Abbott. Dr Estep has received consulting fees, paid to his institution, from Abbott and Medtronic. Dr Silvestry has served as a Medical Advisory Board member for Abbott; and has served as a consultant for Medtronic and Syncardia. Dr Cleveland has received fees from Abbott and Medtronic. Dr Goldstein has served as a Medical Advisory Board member for Abbott; and has served as a consultant for Abbott and Abiomed. Dr Uriel has served as a Medical Advisory Board member for Livemetric and Leviticus. Dr Kormos and Mr Dirckx are Abbott employees. Dr Mehra has received consulting fees, paid to his institution, from Abbott; consulting fees from Janssen, Mesoblast, Broadview Ventures, Natera, Paragonix, Moderna, and Baim Institute for Clinical Research; and has served as an Advisory Board member for NuPulseCV, Leviticus, and FineHeart. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclosure., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: As left ventricular assist device (LVAD) survival rates continue to improve, evaluating site-specific variability in outcomes can facilitate identifying targets for quality-improvement initiative opportunities in the field., Methods: Deidentified center-specific outcomes were analyzed for HeartMate 3 (HM3) patients enrolled in the MOMENTUM 3 pivotal and continued access protocol trials. Centers < 25th percentile for HM3 volumes were excluded. Variability in risk-adjusted center mortality was assessed at 90 days and 2 years (conditional upon 90-day survival). Adverse event (AE) rates were compared across centers., Results: In the 48 included centers (1958 patients), study-implant volumes ranged between 17 and 106 HM3s. Despite similar trial-inclusion criteria, patient demographics varied across sites, including age quartile ((Q)1-Q3:57-62 years), sex (73%-85% male), destination therapy intent (60%-84%), and INTERMACS profile 1-2 (16%-48%). Center mortality was highly variable, nadiring at ≤ 3.6% (≤ 25th percentile) and peaking at ≥ 10.4% (≥ 75th percentile) at 90 days and ≤ 10.2% and ≥ 18.7%, respectively, at 2 years. Centers with low mortality rates tended to have lower 2-year AE rates, but no center was a top performer for all AEs studied., Conclusions: Mortality and AEs were highly variable across MOMENTUM 3 centers. Studies are needed to improve our understanding of the drivers of outcome variability and to ascertain best practices associated with high-performing centers across the continuum of intraoperative to chronic stages of LVAD support., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Heart transplantation is advocated in selected patients with advanced heart failure in the absence of contraindications. Principal challenges in heart transplantation centre around an insufficient and underutilized donor organ pool, the need to individualize titration of immunosuppressive therapy, and to minimize late complications such as cardiac allograft vasculopathy, malignancy, and renal dysfunction. Advances have served to increase the organ donor pool by advocating the use of donors with underlying hepatitis C virus infection and by expanding the donor source to use hearts donated after circulatory death. New techniques to preserve the donor heart over prolonged ischaemic times, and enabling longer transport times in a safe manner, have been introduced. Mechanical circulatory support as a bridge to transplantation has allowed patients with advanced heart failure to avoid progressive deterioration in hepato-renal function while awaiting an optimal donor organ match. The management of the heart transplantation recipient remains a challenge despite advances in immunosuppression, which provide early gains in rejection avoidance but are associated with infections and late-outcome challenges. In this article, we review contemporary advances and challenges in this field to focus on donor recovery strategies, left ventricular assist devices, and immunosuppressive monitoring therapies with the potential to enhance outcomes. We also describe opportunities for future discovery to include a renewed focus on long-term survival, which continues to be an area that is under-studied and poorly characterized, non-human sources of organs for transplantation including xenotransplantation as well as chimeric transplantation, and technology competitive to human heart transplantation, such as tissue engineering., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Patients with heart failure (HF) and coronary artery disease (CAD) have a high risk for cardiovascular (CV) events including HF hospitalization, stroke, myocardial infarction (MI) and sudden cardiac death (SCD). The present study evaluated associations of proteomic biomarkers with CV outcome in patients with CAD and HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), shortly after a worsening HF episode. We performed a case-control study within the COMMANDER HF international, double-blind, randomized placebo-controlled trial investigating the effects of the factor-Xa inhibitor rivaroxaban. Patients with the following first clinical events: HF hospitalization, SCD and the composite of MI or stroke were matched with corresponding controls for age, sex and study drug. Plasma concentrations of 276 proteins with known associations with CV and cardiometabolic mechanisms were analyzed. Results were corrected for multiple testing using false discovery rate (FDR). In 485 cases and 455 controls, 49 proteins were significantly associated with clinical events of which seven had an adjusted FDR < 0.001 (NT-proBNP, BNP, T-cell immunoglobulin and mucin domain containing 4 (TIMD4), fibroblast growth factor 23 (FGF-23), growth differentiation factor-15 (GDF-15), pulmonary surfactant-associated protein D (PSP-D) and Spondin-1 (SPON1)). No significant interactions were identified between the type of clinical event (MI/stroke, SCD or HFH) and specific biomarkers (all interaction FDR > 0.20). When adding the biomarkers significantly associated with the above outcome to a clinical model (including NT-proBNP), the C-index increase was 0.057 (0.033-0.082), p < 0.0001 and the net reclassification index was 54.9 (42.5 to 67.3), p < 0.0001. In patients with HFrEF and CAD following HF hospitalization, we found that NT-proBNP, BNP, TIMD4, FGF-23, GDF-15, PSP-D and SPON1, biomarkers broadly associated with inflammation and remodeling mechanistic pathways, were strong but indiscriminate predictors of a variety of individual CV events., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Aims: The minute ventilation-carbon dioxide production relationship (VE/VCO 2 slope) is widely used for prognostication in heart failure (HF) with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). This study explored the prognostic value of VE/VCO 2 slope across the spectrum of HF defined by ranges of LVEF., Methods and Results: In this single-centre retrospective observational study of 1347 patients with HF referred for cardiopulmonary exercise testing, patients with HF were categorized into HF with reduced (HFrEF, LVEF < 40%, n = 598), mid-range (HFmrEF, 40% ≤ LVEF < 50%, n = 164), and preserved (HFpEF, LVEF ≥ 50%, n = 585) LVEF. Four ventilatory efficiency categories (VC) were defined: VC-I, VE/VCO 2 slope ≤ 29; VC-II, 29 < VE/VCO 2 slope < 36; VC-III, 36 ≤ VE/VCO 2 slope < 45; and VC-IV, VE/VCO 2 slope ≥ 45. The associations of these VE/VCO 2 slope categories with a composite outcome of all-cause mortality or HF hospitalization were evaluated for each category of LVEF. Over a median follow-up of 2.0 (interquartile range: 1.9, 2.0) years, 201 patients experienced the composite outcome. Compared with patients in VC-I, those in VC-II, III, and IV demonstrated three-fold, five-fold, and eight-fold increased risk for the composite outcome. This incremental risk was observed across HFrEF, HFmrEF, and HFpEF cohorts., Conclusions: Higher VE/VCO 2 slope is associated with incremental risk of 2 year all-cause mortality and HF hospitalization across the spectrum of HF defined by LVEF. A multilevel categorical approach to the interpretation of VE/VCO 2 slope may offer more refined risk stratification than the current binary approach employed in clinical practice., (© 2021 The Authors. ESC Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Background: The clinical and cost-effectiveness of left ventricular assist device (LVAD) therapy for patients with advanced heart failure (HF) who are ineligible for heart transplantation is debated in the UK. This study develops an indirect comparison between the fully magnetically levitated HeartMate 3 (HM 3) LVAD and medical therapy (MT) to evaluate expected clinical and cost-effectiveness in the UK National Health Service (NHS) context., Methods: We performed an economic analysis comparing the HM3 pump against the HeartMate II LVAD (MOMENTUM 3), and then another analysis comparing MT with the first- and second-generation HeartMate XVE pump LVAD and HeartMate II LVAD for the same patient population (REMATCH and ROADMAP, respectively). By bridging those 2 analyses, an indirect comparison between HM3 and MT in the form of a network meta-analysis was developed. A literature search was performed to select the most appropriate pair of studies for this purpose. Outcomes were adjusted to produce Kaplan-Meier curves for the cost-effectiveness evaluation by using a decision-analytic model. Data were extrapolated linearly over a 5-year time horizon. Uncertainty and additional scenarios were addressed by one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analysis. Local costs and health utility were used from England, thereby representing the UK context., Results: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for LVAD vs MT in transplant ineligible patients with advanced HF was estimated to be £47,361 per quality-adjusted life year gained, with a 97.1% probability of being cost-effective at £50,000. In a subgroup of patients who are inotropic therapy dependent (INTERMACS 1-3 severity profile), the ICER was £45,616, while for a population with less-ill ambulatory HF (INTERMACS profile 4-7) the ICER changed to £64,051., Conclusions: This study provides evidence that HM3 LVAD therapy in advanced HF patients ineligible for heart transplantation may be cost-effective compared to MT in the NHS UK-England context. The ICER is lowest for patients dependent on inotropic support, but exceeds the willingness to pay threshold of £50,000 in ambulatory noninotropic therapy dependent advanced HF patients., Competing Interests: Disclosure statement Hoong Sern Lim reports honoraria from Abbott and Abiomed. Steven Shaw reports honoraria from Abbott. Mandeep R. Mehra reports payments made to his institution from Abbott for consulting; Consultant fees from Medtronic, Janssen, Mesoblast, Portola, Bayer, Triple Gene, and Baim Institute for Clinical Research. Scientific Advisory Board Member for NuPulseCV, Leviticus and FineHeart., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Atrial fibrillation (AF) in the presence of heart failure (HF) is associated with poor outcomes including a high-risk of stroke and other thromboembolic events. Identifying patients without AF who are at high-risk of developing this arrhythmia has important clinical implications., Aims: To develop a risk score to identify HF patients at high risk of developing AF., Methods: The COMMANDER-HF trial enrolled 5022 patients with HF and a LVEF ≤ 40%, history of coronary artery disease, and absence of AF at baseline (confirmed with an electrocardiogram). Patients were randomized to either rivaroxaban (2.5 mg bid) or placebo. New-onset AF was confirmed by the investigator at study visits., Results: 241 (4.8%) patients developed AF during the follow-up (median 21 months). Older age (≥ 65 years), LVEF < 35%, history of PCI or CABG, White race, SBP < 110 mmHg, and higher BMI (≥ 25 kg/m 2 ) were independently associated with risk of new-onset AF, whereas the use of DAPT was associated with a lower risk of new-onset AF. We then built a risk score from these variables (with good accuracy C-index = 0.71) and calibration across observed and predicted tertiles of risk. New-onset AF events rates increased steeply by increasing tertiles of the risk-score. Compared to tertile 1, the risk of new-onset AF was 2.5-fold higher in tertile 2, and 6.3-fold higher in tertile 3. Rivaroxaban had no effect in reducing new-onset AF. In time-updated models, new-onset AF was associated with a higher risk of subsequent all-cause death: HR (95%CI) 1.38 (1.11-1.73)., Conclusions: A well-calibrated risk-score identified patients at risk of new-onset AF in the COMMANDER-HF trial. Patients who developed AF had a higher risk of subsequent death. Risk of new-onset atrial fibrillation in patients with HFrEF and coronary artery disease., (© 2021. Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)

Background: Heart failure disproportionately affects Black patients. Whether differences among race influence outcomes in advanced heart failure with use of a fully magnetically levitated continuous-flow left ventricular assist device remains uncertain., Methods: We included 515 IDE (Investigational Device Exemption) clinical trial patients and 500 Continued Access Protocol patients implanted with the HeartMate 3 left ventricular assist device in the MOMENTUM 3 study (Multicenter Study of MagLev Technology in Patients Undergoing Mechanical Circulatory Support Therapy With HeartMate 3). Outcomes were compared between Black and White left ventricular assist device recipients for the primary end point of survival free of disabling stroke or reoperation to replace or remove a malfunctioning device at 2 years, overall survival, adverse events, 6-minute walk distance, and quality of life scores., Results: Of 1015 HeartMate 3 patients, 675 were self-identified as White and 285 as Black individuals. The Black patient cohort was younger, more obese and with a history of hypertension, and more nonischemic cause of heart failure, relative to the White patient group. Black and White patients did not experience a difference in the primary end point (81.1% versus 77.9%; hazard ratio, 1.08 [95% CI, 0.76-1.54], P =0.6568). Black patients were at higher risk of adverse events (calculated as events per 100 patient-years), including bleeding (75.4 versus 63.5; P <0.0001), stroke (9.5 versus 7.2; P =0.0183), and hypertension (10.1 versus 3.2; P <0.0001). The 6-minute walk distance was not different at baseline and 6 months between the groups, however, the absolute change from baseline was greater for White patients (median: +183.0 [interquartile range, 42.0-335.3] versus +163.8 [interquartile range, 42.3-315.0] meters, P =0.01). The absolute quality of life measurement (EuroQoL group, 5-dimension, 5-level instrument visual analog scale) at baseline and 6 months was better in the Black patient group, but relative improvement from baseline to 6 months was greater in White patients (median: +20.0 [interquartile range, 5.0-40.0] versus +25.0 [interquartile range, 10.0-45.0]; P =0.0298)., Conclusions: Although the survival free of disabling stroke or reoperation to replace/remove a malfunctioning device at 2 years with the HM 3 left ventricular assist device did not differ by race, Black HeartMate 3 patients experienced a higher morbidity burden and smaller gains in functional capacity and quality of life when compared with White patients. These findings require efforts designed to better understand and overcome these gaps through systematic identification and tackling of putative factors. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifiers: NCT02224755 and NCT02892955.

Background: Patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) are at increased risk of developing and being hospitalised for heart failure (HFH). However, the risk of HFH versus ischemic events may vary among patients with CAD, depending on whether acute myocardial infarction (MI), left ventricular dysfunction or decompensated HF is present at baseline., Aims: We aim to explore the risk of non-fatal events (HFH, MI, stroke) and subsequent death in 3 landmark trials, COMMANDER-HF, EPHESUS and EXAMINE that, together, included patients with CAD with and without reduced ejection fraction and acute MI., Methods: Events, person-time metrics and time-updated Cox models., Results: In COMMANDER-HF the event-rate for the composite of AMI, stroke or all-cause death was 13.5 (12.8-14.3) events/100 py. Rates for AMI and stroke were much lower (2.2 [2.0-2.6] and 1.3 [1.1-1.6] events/100 py, respectively) than the rate of HFH (16.9 [16.1-17.9] events/100 py). In EPHESUS, the rates of MI and stroke were also lower than the rate of HFH: 7.2 (6.7-7.8), 1.9 (1.7-2.3), and 10.6 (9.9-11.3) events/100 py, but this was not true for EXAMINE with 4.4 (4.0-4.9), 0.7 (0.6-0.9), and 2.4 (2.0-2.7) events/100 py, respectively. In all 3 trials, a non-fatal event (HFH, MI or stroke) during follow-up doubled the risk of subsequent mortality. This most commonly followed a HFH., Conclusions: A first or recurrent HFH is common in patients with CAD and AMI or HFrEF and indicates a poor prognosis. Preventing the development of heart failure after AMI and control of congestion in patients with CAD and HFrEF are key unmet needs and therapeutic targets., Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01877915. URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01877915 ., (© 2021. Springer-Verlag GmbH, DE part of Springer Nature.)

Background: Previous studies have suggested that haemodynamic-guided management using an implantable pulmonary artery pressure monitor reduces heart failure hospitalisations in patients with moderately symptomatic (New York Heart Association [NYHA] functional class III) chronic heart failure and a hospitalisation in the past year, irrespective of ejection fraction. It is unclear if these benefits extend to patients with mild (NYHA functional class II) or severe (NYHA functional class IV) symptoms of heart failure or to patients with elevated natriuretic peptides without a recent heart failure hospitalisation. This trial was designed to evaluate whether haemodynamic-guided management using remote pulmonary artery pressure monitoring could reduce heart failure events and mortality in patients with heart failure across the spectrum of symptom severity (NYHA funational class II-IV), including those with elevated natriuretic peptides but without a recent heart failure hospitalisation., Methods: The randomised arm of the haemodynamic-GUIDEed management of Heart Failure (GUIDE-HF) trial was a multicentre, single-blind study at 118 centres in the USA and Canada. Following successful implantation of a pulmonary artery pressure monitor, patients with all ejection fractions, NYHA functional class II-IV chronic heart failure, and either a recent heart failure hospitalisation or elevated natriuretic peptides (based on a-priori thresholds) were randomly assigned (1:1) to either haemodynamic-guided heart failure management based on pulmonary artery pressure or a usual care control group. Patients were masked to their study group assignment. Investigators were aware of treatment assignment but did not have access to pulmonary artery pressure data for control patients. The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause mortality and total heart failure events (heart failure hospitalisations and urgent heart failure hospital visits) at 12 months assessed in all randomly assigned patients. Safety was assessed in all patients. A pre-COVID-19 impact analysis for the primary and secondary outcomes was prespecified. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03387813., Findings: Between March 15, 2018, and Dec 20, 2019, 1022 patients were enrolled, with 1000 patients implanted successfully, and follow-up was completed on Jan 8, 2021. There were 253 primary endpoint events (0·563 per patient-year) among 497 patients in the haemodynamic-guided management group (treatment group) and 289 (0·640 per patient-year) in 503 patients in the control group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·88, 95% CI 0·74-1·05; p=0·16). A prespecified COVID-19 sensitivity analysis using a time-dependent variable to compare events before COVID-19 and during the pandemic suggested a treatment interaction (p interaction =0·11) due to a change in the primary endpoint event rate during the pandemic phase of the trial, warranting a pre-COVID-19 impact analysis. In the pre-COVID-19 impact analysis, there were 177 primary events (0·553 per patient-year) in the intervention group and 224 events (0·682 per patient-year) in the control group (HR 0·81, 95% CI 0·66-1·00; p=0·049). This difference in primary events almost disappeared during COVID-19, with a 21% decrease in the control group (0·536 per patient-year) relative to pre-COVID-19, virtually no change in the treatment group (0·597 per patient-year), and no difference between groups (HR 1·11, 95% CI 0·80-1·55; p=0·53). The cumulative incidence of heart failure events was not reduced by haemodynamic-guided management (0·85, 0·70-1·03; p=0·096) in the overall study analysis but was significantly decreased in the pre-COVID-19 impact analysis (0·76, 0·61-0·95; p=0·014). 1014 (99%) of 1022 patients had freedom from device or system-related complications., Interpretation: Haemodynamic-guided management of heart failure did not result in a lower composite endpoint rate of mortality and total heart failure events compared with the control group in the overall study analysis. However, a pre-COVID-19 impact analysis indicated a possible benefit of haemodynamic-guided management on the primary outcome in the pre-COVID-19 period, primarily driven by a lower heart failure hospitalisation rate compared with the control group., Funding: Abbott., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests JL has received research grants from AstraZeneca, Sensible Medical, and Volumetrix and is a consultant for Abbott, Alleviant Medical, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, CVRx, Edwards, Impulse Dynamics, and VWave. ASD has received research grants from Alnylam, AstraZeneca, Bayer, and Novartis, is a consultant for Abbott and Alnylam, AstraZeneca, Amgen, Biofourmis, Boston Scientific, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cytokinetics, DalCor Pharma, Lexicon, Merck, Novartis, Relypsa, and Regeneron, and has received personal fees from Lupin Pharma and Sun Pharma. KB is a consultant for Abbott and has received personal fees from Pfizer and Novartis. DH is a consultant for Abbott, has received personal fees from Abbott, and has served on advisory boards for Abbott. SRK is a consultant for Abbott and CareDx and has received personal fees from Abbott and CareDx. MRM is a consultant for Abbott, Medtronic, Janssen, Portola, Bayer, Triple Gene, and Baim Institute for Clinical Research, has served on advisory boards for Abbott and Mesoblast, has served on the Clinical Events Committee for GUIDE-HF through the Baim Institute for Clinical Research, and has stock in NuPulseCV, Leviticus, and FineHeart. SFS has received research grants from Medtronic and Zoll, is a consultant for Abbott, Medtronic, and Milestone Pharmaceuticals, and has received personal fees from Medtronic and Zoll. AJS is a consultant for Abbott and has received personal fees from Abbott. FS has received research grants from Amgen and is a consultant for Abbott. MRZ, AD, AM, SP, and MRC are consultants for Abbott. NJ, PS, GG, JH, and PBA are employees of Abbott. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Aim: The MOMENTUM 3 pivotal trial established superiority of the HeartMate 3 (HM3) left ventricular assist device (LVAD), a fully magnetically levitated centrifugal-flow pump, over the HeartMate II axial-flow pump. We now evaluate HM3 LVAD outcomes in a single-arm prospective continuous access protocol (CAP) post-pivotal trial study., Methods and Results: We enrolled 2200 HM3 implanted patients (515 pivotal trial and 1685 CAP patients) and compared outcomes including survival free of disabling stroke or reoperation to replace or remove a malfunctioning device (primary composite endpoint), overall survival and major adverse events at 2 years. The 2-year primary endpoint [76.7% vs. 74.8%; adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 0.87, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.71-1.08, P = 0.21] and overall survival (81.2% vs. 79.0%) were similar among CAP and pivotal cohorts despite sicker patients (more intra-aortic balloon pump use and INTERMACS profile 1) in CAP who were more often intended for destination therapy. Survival was similar between the CAP and pivotal trial in transplant ineligible patients (79.1% vs. 76.7%; adjusted HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.68-1.16, P = 0.38). In a pooled analysis, the 2-year primary endpoint was similar between INTERMACS profiles 1-2 ('unstable' advanced heart failure), profile 3 ('stable' on inotropic therapy), and profiles 4-7 ('stable' ambulatory advanced heart failure) (75.7% vs. 77.6% vs. 72.9%, respectively). The net burden of adverse events was lower in CAP (adjusted rate ratio 0.93, 95% CI 0.88-0.98, P = 0.006), with consequent decrease in hospitalization., Conclusions: The primary results of accumulating HM3 LVAD experience suggest a lower adverse event burden and similar survival compared to the pivotal MOMENTUM 3 trial., (© 2021 The Authors. European Journal of Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Endomyocardial biopsy (EMB) is an invasive procedure, globally most often used for the monitoring of heart transplant rejection. In addition, EMB can have an important complementary role to the clinical assessment in establishing the diagnosis of diverse cardiac disorders, including myocarditis, cardiomyopathies, drug-related cardiotoxicity, amyloidosis, other infiltrative and storage disorders, and cardiac tumors. Improvements in EMB equipment and the development of new techniques for the analysis of EMB samples has significantly improved the diagnostic precision of EMB. The present document is the result of the Trilateral Cooperation Project between the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology, Heart Failure Society of America, and the Japanese Heart Failure Society. It represents an expert consensus aiming to provide a comprehensive, up-to-date perspective on EMB, with a focus on the following main issues: (1) an overview of the practical approach to EMB, (2) an update on indications for EMB, (3) a revised plan for heart transplant rejection surveillance, (4) the impact of multimodality imaging on EMB, and (5) the current clinical practice in the worldwide use of EMB., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Aims: Over decades, left ventricular assist device (LVAD) technology has transitioned from less durable bulky pumps to smaller continuous-flow pumps which have substantially improved long-term outcomes and quality of life. Contemporary LVAD therapy is beleaguered by haemocompatibility-related adverse events including thrombosis, stroke and bleeding. A fully magnetically levitated pump, the HeartMate 3 (HM3, Abbott, USA) LVAD, has been shown to be superior to the older HeartMate II (HMII, Abbott, USA) pump by improving haemocompatibility. Experience with the HM3 LVAD suggests near elimination of de-novo pump thrombosis, a marked reduction in stroke rates, and only a modest decrease in bleeding complications. Since the advent of continuous-flow LVAD therapy, patients have been prescribed a combination of aspirin and anticoagulation therapy on the presumption that platelet activation and perturbations to the haemostatic axis determine their necessity. Observational studies in patients implanted with the HM3 LVAD who suffer bleeding have suggested a signal of reduced subsequent bleeding events with withdrawal of aspirin. The notion of whether antiplatelet therapy can be avoided in an effort to reduce bleeding complications has now been advanced., Methods: To evaluate this hypothesis and its clinical benefits, the Antiplatelet Removal and Hemocompatibility Events with the HeartMate 3 Pump (ARIES HM3) has been introduced as the first-ever international prospective, randomized, double-blind and placebo-controlled, non-inferiority trial in a patient population implanted with a LVAD., Conclusion: This paper reviews the biological and clinical role of aspirin (100 mg) with LVADs and discusses the rationale and design of the ARIES HM3 trial., (© 2021 The Authors. European Journal of Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)