Search

In 2019, the first cases of SARS-CoV-2 were detected in Wuhan, China, and by early 2020 the first cases were identified in the United States. SARS-CoV-2 infections increased in the US causing many states to implement stay-at-home orders and additional safety precautions to mitigate potential outbreaks. As policies changed throughout the pandemic and restrictions lifted, there was an increase in demand for COVID-19 testing which was costly, difficult to obtain, or had long turn-around times. Some academic institutions, including Boston University (BU), created an on-campus COVID-19 screening protocol as part of a plan for the safe return of students, faculty, and staff to campus with the option for in-person classes. At BU, we put together an automated high-throughput clinical testing laboratory with the capacity to run 45,000 individual tests weekly by Fall of 2020, with a purpose-built clinical testing laboratory, a multiplexed reverse transcription PCR (RT-qPCR) test, robotic instrumentation, and trained staff. There were many challenges including supply chain issues for personal protective equipment and testing materials in addition to equipment that were in high demand. The BU Clinical Testing Laboratory (CTL) was operational at the start of Fall 2020 and performed over 1 million SARS-CoV-2 PCR tests during the 2020-2021 academic year., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Importance: The COVID-19 pandemic has severely disrupted US educational institutions. Given potential adverse financial and psychosocial effects of campus closures, many institutions developed strategies to reopen campuses in the fall 2020 semester despite the ongoing threat of COVID-19. However, many institutions opted to have limited campus reopening to minimize potential risk of spread of SARS-CoV-2., Objective: To analyze how Boston University (BU) fully reopened its campus in the fall of 2020 and controlled COVID-19 transmission despite worsening transmission in Boston, Massachusetts., Design, Setting, and Participants: This multifaceted intervention case series was conducted at a large urban university campus in Boston, Massachusetts, during the fall 2020 semester. The BU response included a high-throughput SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction testing facility with capacity to deliver results in less than 24 hours; routine asymptomatic screening for COVID-19; daily health attestations; adherence monitoring and feedback; robust contact tracing, quarantine, and isolation in on-campus facilities; face mask use; enhanced hand hygiene; social distancing recommendations; dedensification of classrooms and public places; and enhancement of all building air systems. Data were analyzed from December 20, 2020, to January 31, 2021., Main Outcomes and Measures: SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis confirmed by reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction of anterior nares specimens and sources of transmission, as determined through contact tracing., Results: Between August and December 2020, BU conducted more than 500 000 COVID-19 tests and identified 719 individuals with COVID-19, including 496 students (69.0%), 11 faculty (1.5%), and 212 staff (29.5%). Overall, 718 individuals, or 1.8% of the BU community, had test results positive for SARS-CoV-2. Of 837 close contacts traced, 86 individuals (10.3%) had test results positive for COVID-19. BU contact tracers identified a source of transmission for 370 individuals (51.5%), with 206 individuals (55.7%) identifying a non-BU source. Among 5 faculty and 84 staff with SARS-CoV-2 with a known source of infection, most reported a transmission source outside of BU (all 5 faculty members [100%] and 67 staff members [79.8%]). A BU source was identified by 108 of 183 undergraduate students with SARS-CoV-2 (59.0%) and 39 of 98 graduate students with SARS-CoV-2 (39.8%); notably, no transmission was traced to a classroom setting., Conclusions and Relevance: In this case series of COVID-19 transmission, BU used a coordinated strategy of testing, contact tracing, isolation, and quarantine, with robust management and oversight, to control COVID-19 transmission in an urban university setting.

Background: Driveline infection (DLI) is a cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices (CF-LVADs). We hypothesized that an alternate dressing protocol would decrease the rate of DLIs., Methods and Results: A retrospective review of CF-LVAD implants at a single institution from January 2010 to October 2015 was conducted. Patients were divided into implants before (group 1) and after (group 2) the introduction of the new protocol on September 1, 2012. Patients were followed until death, transplantation, change in dressing type, or 2 years. 153 patients were included: 61 in group 1 and 92 in group 2. Group 1 had fewer HVADs than group 2 (27.9% vs 71.7%; P < .001) and more destination therapy, although the latter was not statistically significant (50.8% vs 34.8%; P = .118). At 24 months, the freedom from DLI was 53% in group 1 and 89% in group 2 (P = .01). Group 1 had a significantly greater risk of DLI than group 2 (incident rate ratio 3.18, 95% confidence interval 1.23-8.18; P = .016)., Conclusions: Dramatic improvement in freedom from DLI at 2 years was achieved with a new driveline dressing protocol. This demonstrates that DLI rates can be improved with alternate percutaneous site care techniques in CF-LVAD patients., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Reports of left ventricular assist device (LVAD) malfunction have focused on pump thrombosis. However, the device consists of the pump, driveline, and peripherals, all of which are potentially subject to failure., Methods: Prospectively collected data were reviewed for all LVAD device malfunctions (DMs) occurring in rotary LVADs implanted at a single center between April 2004 and May 2016. Durable LVADs included 108 Heartmate II (HM II) and 105 HeartWare VAD (HVAD). DM data were categorized according to device type and into categories related to the component that failed: (1) controller, (2) peripheral components, and (3) implantable blood pump or its integral electric driveline. Pump-related events were analyzed as pump-specific (suspected or confirmed thrombosis) or nonpump-specific (driveline failure). DM rates were reported as events per 1000 patient-days, and Cox proportional hazard models were used for time-to-event analyses. Cumulative rates of malfunction were examined for the main components of each type of LVAD., Results: Types of DM included controller failure (30%), battery failure (19%), or patient cable failure (14%), whereas only 13% were because of pump failure. DMs were more common in the HM II device (3.73 per 1000 patient-days versus 3.06 per 1000 patient-days for the HVAD, P <0.01). A higher rate of pump-specific malfunctions was discovered in those implanted with an HM II versus an HVAD (0.55 versus 0.39, respectively; P <0.01) and peripheral malfunctions (2.32 versus 1.78 for the HM II and HVAD, respectively; P <0.01); no difference occurred in the incidence of controller DM between the 2 LVADs. Patients with HVAD were 90% free of a pump-specific malfunction at 3 years compared with 56% for the HM II (log-rank P <0.003). Only 74% of the patients with HM II were free of pump thrombosis at 3 years compared with 90% of the patients with HVAD. Freedom from failure of the integrated driveline was 79% at 3 years for the HM II but 100% for the HVAD (log-rank P <0.02)., Conclusions: Device malfunction is much broader than pump failure alone and occurs for different components at different rates based on the type of LVAD., (© 2017 American Heart Association, Inc.)

Background: Continuous flow (CF) left ventricular assist devices (LVAD) are afterload sensitive and therefore pump performance is affected by hypertension. In addition, poorly controlled hypertension may increase the risk of aortic insufficiency (AI) and stroke. Blood pressure regimens after CF LVAD have not been studied and their impact on rates of AI and stroke are unknown., Methods: Patients who had CF LVAD at a single center and were supported greater than 30 days were included. Blood pressure was monitored at home by Doppler. Outpatient management of blood pressure was conducted according to a predefined institutional protocol (target mean arterial pressure ≤ 80 mm Hg)., Results: A total of 96 patients were included. At the end of follow-up, 25 patients were not on an antihypertensive drug, of these 9 died. Of the 74% receiving antihypertensives, 54% required 1 medication, 34% were on 2, 10% were on 3, and 3% were on 4 or more. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin II receptor blockers (85% of patients on an antihypertensive) and beta blockers (30%) were the most commonly prescribed medications. There was a significantly higher neurologic event rate in those on no antihypertensives compared with those on antihypertensives (p = 0.009). Only 3% of patients with no or mild AI at baseline progressed to develop moderate or greater AI after a mean of 201 days of follow-up., Conclusions: Blood pressure control can be achieved in patients with CF LVADs, with the majority of patients requiring only 1 or 2 antihypertensives., (Copyright © 2014 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Ventricular assist devices (VADs) are a surgical treatment for heart failure. These devices may be implanted as a bridge to transplant or as destination therapy. After surgical recovery and education regarding device care, patients are discharged home. Meticulous care of the driveline must be taken to prevent infection and trauma of the site throughout the perioperative event and for the duration of support. Currently a standardized protocol for care of the driveline and exit site does not exist. VAD coordinators from across the country discussed the variability in care at different centers in the United States through a series of conference calls. A survey consisting of 16 questions was developed. The survey included questions on preoperative antibiotic recommendations, driveline placement and exit site suturing, frequency of dressing changes, and showering practices. VAD coordinators shared center-specific dressing protocols and any driveline success stories. This survey was sent to 73 centers; 38 centers (52%) responded. The purpose of the survey was to define current practice in order to move toward a standard of practice or protocol based on expert opinion for VAD driveline care and to assess the need for future studies.

Background: Obesity and heart failure are increasingly common, but the outcomes, weight changes, and adverse events of patients with advanced heart failure and obesity on mechanical support is not well described., Methods: We retrospectively reviewed all non-underweight patients with durable mechanical support at a single institution from January 2000 until December 2008 and compared outcomes, weight change, and Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support-defined adverse events between obese and nonobese patients., Results: A total of 169 patients were included; 113 (67%) nonobese and 56 (33%) obese. Baseline characteristics, pump types, and implant duration were similar for both populations with the exception of more diabetes (61% vs 26%, p < 0.0001) and hypertension (61% vs 42%, p = 0.019) in the obese. Outcomes on mechanical support at 6 months were not different between groups. There was no significant difference between the nonobese and obese groups in the change in body mass index (-0.3 vs -1.0 mg/m(2), p = 0.29) over the duration of support. Obese patients, as compared with the nonobese, had higher incidence rates of sepsis (64.5% vs 34.7%, respectively, p = 0.006) and reoperation for infectious complications (34.2% vs 13.3%, respectively, p = 0.014). Obese patients also had a higher cumulative incidence of sepsis and reoperation for infection. Two-year posttransplant outcomes were not different in the obese and nonobese., Conclusions: Obese patients have similar outcomes on mechanical support, but at the cost of a higher cumulative incidence of sepsis and reoperations for infection; however, obese patients lose little weight while on mechanical support., (Copyright © 2011 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Renal dysfunction is common before mechanical circulatory support (MCS). Mechanical circulatory support frequently improves renal function, but the impact of pre-MCS renal dysfunction on renal function after cardiac transplantation (CTX) is unknown., Methods: Patients with MCS from January 1995 until April 2008 at a single center were included if their MCS duration was at least 60 days and they underwent successful CTX. Patients were followed for 1 year after CTX., Results: A total of 116 patients were included in the study. Mechanical circulatory support was biventricular assist device in 28% and left ventricular assist device in 72% (continuous flow left ventricular assist device, 14%). Mean duration of MCS was 124 days. Patients were grouped according to tertiles of pre-MCS creatinine clearance (CrCl): group 1, CrCl less than 45 mL/min; group 2, CrCl between 45 and 65 mL/min inclusive; and group 3, CrCl more than 65 mL/min. Group 3 had the best renal outcomes both after MCS and 1 year after CTX. Regardless of group, patients who had a CrCl of at least 60 mL/min before CTX had similar 1-year posttransplant CrCl (55 versus 53 versus 56 mL/min for groups 1 through 3, respectively; not significantly different). However, the ability to achieve this level of renal function after MCS was less likely in those with the worst renal function before the initiation of MCS (53% versus 74% versus 90% for groups 1 through 3, respectively; p=0.001)., Conclusions: The use of MCS leads to improvements in renal function in patients after MCS. However, the renal outcomes after CTX seem to be more dependent on the level of renal function achieved during MCS than on the level of renal function before MCS., (Copyright © 2011 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Presentation of a case study involving a female patient, in her 20s, undergoing routine surgery for removal of atrial myxoma leading to a heart transplant. This case study will show the progression from postcardiotomy failure, the emergent use of the extracorporeal membrane oxygenator device, the insertion of the HeartMate device, and the final return to the operating room for a heart transplant. The case study will examine the physiologic demands on the patient, as well as the psychological effects from the various life-saving devices.