Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 1997 Jan;113(1):202-9.
doi: 10.1016/S0022-5223(97)70416-1.

Preoperative and postoperative comparison of patients with univentricular and biventricular support with the thoratec ventricular assist device as a bridge to cardiac transplantation

D J Farrar  1 , J D Hill, D G Pennington, L R McBride, W L Holman, R L Kormos, D Esmore, L A Gray Jr, P E Seifert, G P Schoettle, C H Moore, P J Hendry, J N Bhayana
Affiliations
Free article

Preoperative and postoperative comparison of patients with univentricular and biventricular support with the thoratec ventricular assist device as a bridge to cardiac transplantation

D J Farrar et al. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1997 Jan.
Free article

Abstract

Objectives: The goal of this study was to determine whether there are differences in populations of patients with heart failure who require univentricular or biventricular circulatory support.

Methods: Two hundred thirteen patients who were in imminent risk of dying before donor heart procurement and who received Thoratec left (LVAD) and right (RVAD) ventricular assist devices at 35 hospitals were divided into three groups: group 1 (n = 74), patients adequately supported with isolated LVADs; group 2 (n = 37), patients initially receiving an LVAD and later requiring an RVAD; and group 3 (n = 102), patients who received biventricular assistance (BiVAD) from the beginning.

Results: There were no significant differences in any preoperative factors between the two BiVAD groups. In the combined BiVAD groups, pre-VAD cardiac index (BiVAD, 1.4 +/- 0.6 L/min per square meter, vs LVAD, 1.6 +/- 0.6 L/min per square meter) and pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (BiVAD, 27 +/- 8 mm Hg, vs LVAD, 30 +/- 8 mm Hg) were significantly lower than those in the LVAD group, and pre-VAD creatinine levels were significantly higher (BiVAD, 1.9 +/- 1.1 mg/dl, vs LVAD, 1.4 +/- 0.6 mg/dl). In addition, greater proportions of patients in the BiVAD groups required mechanical ventilation before VAD placement (60% vs 35%) and were implanted under emergency conditions than in the LVAD group (22% vs 9%). The survival of patients through heart transplantation was significantly better in patients who had an LVAD (74%) than in those who had BiVADs (58%). However, there were no significant differences in posttransplantation survival through hospital discharge (LVAD, 89%; BiVAD, 81%).

Conclusion: Patients who received LVADs were less severely ill before the operation and consequently were more likely to survive after the operation. As the severity of illness increases, patients are more likely to require biventricular support.

PubMed Disclaimer