title: Can the temporary use of right ventricular assist devices bridge patients with acute right ventricular failure after cardiac surgery to recovery?
abstract: A best evidence topic in cardiac surgery was written according to a structured protocol. The question addressed was: Can the temporary use of right ventricular assist devices (RVADs) bridge patients to recovery who suffer acute right ventricular failure after cardiac surgery? More than 183 papers were found using the reported search, of which 13 represented the best evidence to answer the clinical question. The authors, journal, date and country of publication, patient group studied, study type, relevant outcomes and results of these papers are tabulated. Indications for surgical intervention included coronary artery bypass surgery, valve replacement, post-heart transplant and left ventricular assist device insertion. Significant reductions in central venous pressure (P = 0.005) and mean pulmonary artery pressures (P < 0.01) were reported during and after RVAD support. Furthermore, increases in right ventricular cardiac output (P < 0.05), right ventricular ejection fraction (P < 0.05), right ventricular stroke work (P < 0.05) and pulmonary artery oxygen saturations (P < 0.05) were also seen. Assessment by one study showed that on Day 7 after RVAD removal, the right ventricular ejection fraction had increased by up to 40%. Dynamic echocardiography studies performed before, during and after RVAD placement demonstrated that after RVAD implantation, right ventricular end-diastolic dimensions (P < 0.05) and right atrial dimensions decreased (P < 0.05) and right ventricular ejection fraction (P < 0.05) increased. Although several studies successfully weaned patients from an RVAD, there were several complications, including bleeding requiring surgical intervention. However, this may be reduced by using percutaneous implantation (bleeding incidence: 4 of 9 patients) rather than by a surgically implanted RVAD (bleeding incidence: 5 of 5 patients). However, mortality is higher in percutaneous RVAD patients rather than in surgical RVAD (80-44%) patients. Causes of death cited for patients on an RVAD included multiorgan failure, sepsis, thromboembolic events, reoccurring right heart failure and failure to wean due to persistent right ventricular failure. We conclude that RVADs have been successfully used to bridge patients to recovery after cardiac surgery; however, RVADs carry numerous risks and a high mortality rate.
authors.affiliation: School of Medicine, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
authors.forename: Sommer A
authors.initials: SA
authors.lastname: Lang
authors.forename: Bridie
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: O'Neill
authors.forename: Paul
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Waterworth
authors.forename: Haris
authors.initials: H
authors.lastname: Bilal
mesh_terms: D000208:Acute Disease; D019985:Benchmarking; D006348:Cardiac Surgical Procedures / Q000009:adverse effects* / Q000401:mortality; D019317:Evidence-Based Medicine; D006333:Heart Failure / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000209:etiology / Q000401:mortality / Q000503:physiopathology / Q000628:therapy*; D006353:Heart-Assist Devices / Q000009:adverse effects; D006801:Humans; D018579:Patient Selection; D011474:Prosthesis Design; D020127:Recovery of Function; D012307:Risk Factors; D013997:Time Factors; D016896:Treatment Outcome; D018497:Ventricular Dysfunction, Right / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000209:etiology / Q000401:mortality / Q000503:physiopathology / Q000628:therapy*; D016278:Ventricular Function, Right
keywords: Heart assist devices; Review; Ventricular dysfunction, right