Faculty Bibliography

Over the past several decades, the operation of choice for end-stage lung disease secondary to severe pulmonary hypertension (PH) has shifted from heart-lung transplantation (HLT) to bilateral lung transplantation (BLT). This change has maintained excellent long-term outcomes and is appropriate for the majority of patients presenting with end-stage disease in need of transplantation. However, a distinct subset of patients with severe PH have an excessive early mortality within 90 days of transplantation. Based on the different causes of this early mortality compared to BLT recipients with other indications, right heart failure and refractory primary graft dysfunction (PGD) appear to play a significant role. It is therefore critical to identify this subset of patient during their evaluation for transplant. This distinction would allow specific patient referral for HLT, which may mitigate those causes of early mortality. Similarly, there is a subgroup of BLT recipients for severe PH that fail to recover right ventricular function, with suboptimal long-term functional status that is independent of early survival. Identification and referral for HLT of these patients may also be important. In this manuscript, we describe our institutional approach and consideration for the risks of early mortality from right heart failure and PGD, as well failure of right ventricular recovery long-term. The described evaluation is used to ascertain those patients with severe PH who may benefit from a HLT over BLT.

Introduction: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remains a worldwide pandemic with some patients requiring escalation to venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO). Our ECMO Program placed 30 adult COVID-19 patients on VV ECMO within six weeks. This surge required immediate assessment of our program's current structure and resources and rapid execution of an emergency response plan.
Method(s): Additional hardware and disposable supplies were acquired through capital purchases, rental agreements, collaboration with neighboring institutions, and repurposing of existing equipment. All patients were ultimately cohorted to one location. Our Perfusion team implemented a new staffing schedule to increase ECMO coverage. A condensed COVID ECMO course was created to increase the number of ECMO-trained nurses. Existing bedside cannulation carts and an exchange process with Central Supply allowed for multiple cannulations in various locations. A daily report was distributed to ECMO and hospital leadership to promote effective communication and ensure transparency of ECMO capacity.
Result(s): As of August 20th, 27 patients survived to ECMO decannulation and 23 patients survived to hospital discharge. Five patients remain hospitalized. During the surge, we averaged 13 patients on ECMO per day, which was an increase over our baseline of 3.5 patients per day for the six months preceding COVID-19.
Conclusion(s): We conclude that it is possible to safely expand ECMO capacity during a pandemic. This requires proper planning and reallocation of resources as necessary. Our navigation of the surge was aided by our existing program processes and the generosity of neighboring ECMO programs and our industry partners

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:Patients with low left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) undergoing high-risk coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) are at increased risk for postcardiotomy cardiogenic shock. This report describes planned concomitant microaxial temporary mechanical support (MA-TMS) device placement as a viable bridge-to-recovery strategy for high-risk patients receiving surgical revascularization. METHODS:A retrospective review was performed for all patients from October 2017 to May 2019 with low LVEF (<30%), New York Heart Association Class III or IV symptoms, and myocardial viability who underwent CABG with prophylactic MA-TMS support at a single institution (n = 13). RESULTS:Mean patient age was 64.8 years, and 12 patients (92%) were male. Eight patients (62%) presented with acute coronary syndrome. Mean predicted risk of mortality was 4.6%, ranging from 0.6% to 15.6%. An average of 3.4 grafts were performed per patient. Greater than 60% of patients were extubated within 48 hours and out-of-bed within 72 hours, and the average duration of MA-TMS was 5.7 days. Mean postoperative length of stay was 16.7 days. There were no postoperative myocardial infarctions or deaths. CONCLUSIONS:Prophylactic MA-TMS may allow safe and effective surgical revascularization for patients with severe left ventricular dysfunction who may otherwise be offered a durable ventricular assist device.

BACKGROUND:The national opioid epidemic may have expanded the donor pool for lung transplantation, but concerns remain regarding infectious risks and allograft function. This study compared donor/recipient characteristics, outcomes, and reasons for organ discard between overdose death donors (ODD) and all other mechanism-of-death donors. METHODS:Data on adult lung transplants from 2000-2017 were provided by the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients. Pulmonary allografts used in multiple organ transplantations were excluded. Donor/recipient demographics, outcomes, and organ discard were analyzed with regards to ODD since 2010. Discard analysis was limited to donors who had at least one organ transplanted but their pulmonary allografts discarded. RESULTS:From 2010-2017, 7.3% (962/13,196) of lung transplantations were from ODD, over a 3-fold increase from the 2.1% (164/7,969) in 2000-2007. ODD were younger but more likely to have a history of smoking, hepatitis C, or an abnormal bronchoscopy finding. Overall survival was similar between ODD and non-ODD groups. ODD of discarded pulmonary allografts were younger and more likely to be hepatitis C positive, but were less likely to have a history of smoking than their non-ODD counterparts. CONCLUSIONS:Rates of ODD utilization in lung transplantation have increased in accordance with the opioid epidemic, but there remains a significant pool of ODD pulmonary allografts with favorable characteristics that are discarded. With no significant difference in survival between ODD and non-ODD recipients, further expansion of this donor pool may be appropriate and pulmonary allografts should not be discarded based solely on ODD status.

BACKGROUND:The national opioid epidemic has expanded the donor pool for heart transplantation, but concerns remain regarding infectious risk and allograft function. This study compared donor and recipient characteristics, outcomes, and reasons for organ discard between overdose-death donors (ODDs) and donors with all other mechanism of death. METHODS:Data on adult cardiac transplants from 2010 to 2017 were provided by the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients. Cardiac allografts used in multiple organ transplantations were excluded. Recipient and donor characteristics and organ discard were analyzed with regard to ODDs. Kaplan-Meier curves and log-rank tests described mortality survival. RESULTS:A total of 1,710 of 15,904 (10.8%) cardiac transplantations were from ODDs, approximately a 10-fold increase from 2000 (1.2%). ODDs were more frequently older than 40 years of age (87.2% vs 70.1%; p < 0.001), had higher rates of substance abuse, were more likely hepatitis C positive (1.3% vs 0.2%; p < 0.001), and less frequently required inotropic support at the time of procurement (38.4% vs 44.8%; p < 0.001). Overall survival was not different between the groups (p = 0.066). Discarded ODD allografts were more likely to be hepatitis C positive (30.8% vs 5.3%; p < 0.001) and to be identified as conveying increased risk by the Public Health Services (63.3% vs 13.2%; p < 0.001), but they were less likely to be discarded because of a diseased organ state (28.2% vs 36.1%; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS:Rates of ODDs have increased corresponding with the worsening opioid epidemic. Even though ODDs have higher rates of hepatitis C, cardiac allograft quality indices are favorable, and recipient outcomes are similar when compared with non-ODDs, a finding indicating that greater use of this donor pool may be appropriate.

AIMS/OBJECTIVE:The risk of HeartMate II (HMII) left ventricular assist device (LVAD) thrombosis has been reported, and serum lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), a biomarker of haemolysis, increases secondary to LVAD thrombosis. This study evaluated longitudinal measurements of LDH post-LVAD implantation, hypothesizing that LDH trends could timely predict future LVAD thrombosis. METHODS AND RESULTS/RESULTS:From October 2004 to October 2014, 350 HMIIs were implanted in 323 patients at Cleveland Clinic. Of these, patients on 339 HMIIs had at least one post-implant LDH value (7996 total measurements). A two-step joint model combining longitudinal biomarker data and pump thrombosis events was generated to assess the effect of changing LDH on thrombosis risk. Device-specific LDH trends were first smoothed using multivariate boosted trees, and then used as a time-varying covariate function in a multiphase hazard model to analyse time to thrombosis. Pre-implant variables associated with time-varying LDH values post-implant using boostmtree were also investigated. Standardized variable importance for each variable was estimated as the difference between model-based prediction error of LDH when the variable was randomly permuted and prediction error without permuting the values. The larger this difference, the more important a variable is for predicting the trajectory of post-implant LDH. Thirty-five HMIIs (10%) had either confirmed (18) or suspected (17) thrombosis, with 15 (43%) occurring within 3 months of implant. LDH was associated with thrombosis occurring both early and late after implant (P < 0.0001 for both hazard phases). The model demonstrated increased probability of HMII thrombosis as LDH trended upward, with steep changes in LDH trajectory paralleling trajectories in probability of pump thrombosis. The most important baseline variables predictive of the longitudinal pattern of LDH were higher bilirubin, higher pre-implant LDH, and older age. The effect of some pre-implant variables such as sodium on the post-implant LDH longitudinal pattern differed across time. CONCLUSIONS:Longitudinal trends in surveillance LDH for patients on HMII support are useful for dynamic prediction of pump thrombosis, both early after implant and late. Incorporating upward and downward trends in LDH that dynamically update a model of LVAD thrombosis risk provides a useful tool for clinical management and decisions.

Introduction: Our institution's Adult ECMO Program started in 2015 and continues to see exponential growth with an average of 89% annual increase in volume. When demand for ECMO exceeds available resources, the multiple teams, resources and processes involved in the care of these patients are challenged to provide excellent outcomes. Our program made specific changes to accommodate increased volume while maintaining quality. Our growth directly impacted staff exposure and expertise, locations of ECMO care, emergent bedside cannulations, and utilization of equipment and supplies.
Result(s): Our team coordinated comprehensive training courses to increase the number of ECMO-credentialed physicians and advanced practice providers. We then focused on improving bedside cannulations. We provided cannulation didactic and simulation training for a cohort of critical care nurses, created a single ECMO Perfusion activation number, and increased available primed circuits. We also rebuilt our cannulation carts, using an exchange process for immediate replenishment of supplies. All carts were streamlined to one lay out and were expanded across the hospital in five different locations. We increased our equipment inventory from 9 to 15 consoles and introduced a more cost-effective ECMO system. Last, we implemented ECMO safety rounds, a biweekly bedside audit of existing safety measures that also allowed for real-time staff education.
Conclusion(s): Our patient outcomes continue to meet the national ELSO benchmarks for survival rates. As our growth continues, all areas require ongoing assessment and evaluation to maintain best practices. With proper planning and resources, quality patient outcomes can be maintained