ライフサイエンスコーパス: LVAD

1 LVAD implantation resulted in a remarkable decrease in h

2 LVAD patients had significant improvement in 3 of 5 Euro

3 LVAD patients were more severely ill, with more patients

4 LVAD patients with Ang-2 levels above the mean (12.32 ng

5 LVAD support caused significant degradation of high-mole

6 LVAD support causes pathologic degradation of von Willeb

7 LVAD therapy resulted in improvement of patient health s

8 LVAD-associated unloading for 6 months resulted in a sub

9 the incidence of controller DM between the 2 LVADs.

10 LVAD patients met the primary endpoint (39% LVAD vs. 21% OMM; odds ratio: 2.4 [95% confidence interv

11 modynamic and echocardiographic data from 44 LVAD patients and 18 untransplanted normal donors.

12 Among 63 LVAD patients (60+/-12 years old and 25 female [40%]), 2

13 Assisted Circulatory Support profile 4 (65% LVAD vs. 34% OMM; p < 0.001) than 5 to 7.

14 n October 2009 and July 2015, a total of 652 LVAD were implanted in 557 patients.

15 Most patients (80% LVAD vs. 62% OMM; p < 0.001) required hospitalizations.

16 p supported with a continuous-flow LVAD (n=9 LVAD, n=11 control).

17 A total of 96 LVAD recipients were included in this study.

18 41), observational study of 200 patients (97 LVAD, 103 OMM).

19 rated all but one as biased toward accepting LVAD therapy.

20 e Americans, and are biased toward accepting LVAD therapy.

21 ailing LV samples collected before and after LVAD and from nonfailing human LV (n=8) was conducted.

22 egulated in advanced heart failure and after LVAD support.

23 nts despite favorable glycemic control after LVAD implantation.

24 a 27% reduction in the hazard of death after LVAD (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.73; 95% confidence interv

25 a 22% reduction in the hazard of death after LVAD (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.78; 95% confidence interv

26 ce and predictors of cognitive decline after LVAD using a valid, sensitive assessment tool.

27 size (cross-sectional area) decreased after LVAD unloading from 1,238 +/- 81 mum(2) to 1,011 +/- 68

28 remodeling, there were no differences after LVAD use in capillary density (0.78 +/- 0.1% vs. 0.9 +/-

29 orse outcomes than patients without DM after LVAD implantation and whether LVAD support resulted in a

30 l vascularity was significantly higher after LVAD support versus controls (5.2+/-1.0% versus 2.1+/-0.

31 (n = 956) discharged from the hospital after LVAD implantation in the HMII bridge to transplantation

32 The need for RVAD implantation after LVAD is associated with indices of global illness severi

33 ide levels all significantly increased after LVAD implantation (median values from implantation to 3

34 ion of the first signs of inflammation after LVAD implantation.

35 patients required VT ablation <1 month after LVAD implantation because of intractable VT.

36 nerating study suggests that mortality after LVAD placement is impacted by caregiver understanding of

37 n were powerful predictors of outcomes after LVAD implantation in this data set.

38 alth status, and mortality in patients after LVAD.

39 han those without cholesterol recovery after LVAD implantation.

40 tive pro-fibrotic macrophage signaling after LVAD use.

41 feasible and reasonably safe even soon after LVAD implantation.

42 One-year survival after LVAD explantation, available in INTERMACS for 21 (11%) p

43 uscle mean Hounsfield unit on survival after LVAD implantation.

44 athy Questionnaire <45 during the year after LVAD (persistently limiting heart failure symptoms and p

45 ccurs commonly in patients in the year after LVAD and is associated with older age and destination th

46 dence of cognitive decline in the year after LVAD implantation, treating death and transplantation as

47 y poor quality of life during the year after LVAD.

48 ctively collected data were reviewed for all LVAD device malfunctions (DMs) occurring in rotary LVADs

49 RS-predicted versus observed survival in all LVAD patients (n=111) using Cox modeling, receiver-opera

50 Among LVAD patients, the HMRS had marginal discrimination and

51 Catheter ablation of VT among LVAD recipients is feasible and reasonably safe even soo

52 resources exist for patients considering an LVAD, the content is suboptimal.

53 The risk of death for an LVAD patient was also significantly lower among those wh

54 imers by the metalloprotease ADAMTS-13 in an LVAD-driven circulation.

55 pathy who were scheduled for placement of an LVAD as a bridge to transplantation underwent bone marro

56 istinction to euthanasia, deactivation of an LVAD does not introduce new intervention or an additiona

57 udy evaluated whether patients undergoing an LVAD bridge-to-recovery protocol can achieve cardiac and

58 adult patients bridged to primary HT with an LVAD between May 2004 and April 2014 were identified in

59 bnormal intestinal vascular architecture and LVAD-associated vWF degradation were consistent findings

60 ity in exploring multiple causes of AVWS and LVAD-associated hemostatic complications.

61 ding the associations between caregivers and LVAD patients, as well as interventions that may improve

62 , atrial fibrillation, coronary disease, and LVAD type as time-dependent Cox proportional hazard mode

63 ause for the loss of large VWF multimers and LVAD-associated bleeding remains circumstantial.

64 rsus observed survival (overall survival and LVAD-free survival) in the optimal medical management ar

65 all-cause death, heart transplantation, and LVAD was independently related to ablation outcome (at 1

66 estimated the risk of clinical worsening and LVAD implantation.

67 At LVAD implantation, all fractions and a saline control we

68 ricular ejection fraction of 17%+/-5% before LVAD implantation.

69 outcome, which may inform discussions before LVAD implantation to enable more realistic expectations

70 sma samples were obtained from humans before LVAD implantation and during LVAD support (n=41).

71 omographies performed in the 3 months before LVAD implantation (n=143).

72 n and improved communication of risks before LVAD implantation.

73 patients with the Trail Making B Test before LVAD and at 3, 6, and 12 months.

74 eral challenges remain to be overcome before LVADs will be considered as the therapy of choice for al

75 metabolism may be a mechanistic link between LVAD support, abnormal angiogenesis, gastrointestinal an

76 had higher rates of ischemic cardiomyopathy, LVAD implantation as destination therapy, and increased

77 outpatients at our center who received a CF-LVAD between January 2005 and August 2013.

78 and proteinuria are predictors RRT after CF-LVAD implantation and should be routinely assessed in CF

79 zed in patients with or without RRT after CF-LVAD implantation.

80 fy risk factors associated with RRT after CF-LVAD implantation.

81 also a significant predictor of RRT after CF-LVAD implantation.

82 were significant predictors of RRT after CF-LVAD support.

83 nsecutive patients underwent contemporary CF-LVAD implantation at the Columbia University Medical Cen

84 not offer a decision-making algorithm for CF-LVAD candidates with poor baseline renal function.

85 ation and should be routinely assessed in CF-LVAD candidates to guide decision making.

86 dynamics in these patients supported with CF-LVAD.

87 rted an increase in pump thrombosis among CF-LVADs, especially within the first 6 months of implant.

88 ous-flow left ventricular assist devices (CF-LVADs), stratified by anticoagulation intensity.

89 ous-flow left ventricular assist devices (CF-LVADs).

90 ous-flow left ventricular assist devices (CF-LVADs).

91 Previous studies of outpatients with CF-LVADs have suggested that target international normalize

92 he hospital among patients supported with CF-LVADs.

93 he hospital among patients supported with CF-LVADs.

94 s hemodynamics in patients supported with CF-LVADs.

95 pling and functional recovery during chronic LVAD unloading.

96 6; P=0.008) correlated with all-cause death, LVAD, and heart transplantation.

97 ation (OHT), left ventricular assist device (LVAD) as destination therapy or bridge to transplant.

98 loading by a left ventricular assist device (LVAD) by small RNA sequencing.

99 Timing of left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation in advanced heart failure patients no

100 ected during left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation may contribute to myocardial recovery

101 f DM on post-left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation outcomes is unclear.

102 ation, 1 had left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation, and 1 patient eventually died becaus

103 us flow (CF) left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation.

104 A left ventricular assist device (LVAD) improves survival and quality of life for many, bu

105 pport with a left ventricular assist device (LVAD) is an established treatment for patients with adva

106 Reports of left ventricular assist device (LVAD) malfunction have focused on pump thrombosis.

107 implantable left ventricular assist device (LVAD) or heart transplant, or experience myocardial reco

108 a subset of left ventricular assist device (LVAD) patients can achieve significant improvement of th

109 outcomes for left ventricular assist device (LVAD) patients remains unclear.

110 s undergoing left ventricular assist device (LVAD) placement as a bridge to cardiac transplantation.

111 After left ventricular assist device (LVAD) placement for advanced heart failure, increased ce

112 ho underwent left ventricular assist device (LVAD) placement were studied.

113 centers with left ventricular assist device (LVAD) research programs focused on cardiac recovery is v

114 ntation of a left ventricular assist device (LVAD) reverses some of the metabolic derangements of adv

115 tinuous-flow left ventricular assist device (LVAD) support.

116 tinuous-flow left ventricular assist device (LVAD) surgery.

117 selected for left ventricular assist device (LVAD) were more likely to be alive at 1 year on original

118 te II (HMII) left ventricular assist device (LVAD), but the impact of AF on clinical outcomes is unce

119 age HF after left ventricular assist device (LVAD)-induced remodeling to identify mechanisms impeding

120 cheduled for left ventricular assist device (LVAD; 60 patients), in patients being evaluated for LVAD

121 mation after left ventricle assisted device (LVAD) implantation for patients suffering from heart fai

122 val while on left ventricular assist device (LVADs) support and after HT.

123 Left ventricular assist devices (LVAD) provide cardiac support for patients with end-stag

124 inuous-flow left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) and directly measure aortic wall composition and

125 inuous-flow left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) and is caused by arteriovenous malformations.

126 Left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) are increasingly used as a bridge to cardiac tran

127 nloading by left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) has been demonstrated in subgroups of patients wi

128 s receiving left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) has decoupling of their diastolic pulmonary arter

129 Left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) have been used as an effective therapeutic option

130 inuous-flow left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) have revolutionized advanced heart failure care.

131 Data for left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) in patients with noninotrope-dependent heart fail

132 antation of left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) on mitochondrial content, DDR, and cardiomyocyte

133 These early left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) suffered significant adverse events, thereby limi

134 Left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) were developed as a means of temporary circulator

135 lication of left ventricular assist devices (LVADs).

136 Some patients offered a DT LVAD face the decision by reflecting on a process and re

137 s with caregivers of patients considering DT LVAD.

138 1 caregiver of a patient who had declined DT LVAD.

139 n therapy left ventricular assist device (DT LVAD) implantation; however, the caregiver experience su

140 Decision-making surrounding DT LVAD should incorporate decision support for patients an

141 f approach, most patients experienced the DT LVAD decision as a highly emotional process and many sou

142 rs: 10 caregivers of patients living with DT LVAD, 6 caregivers of patients who had died with DT LVAD

143 caregivers of patients who had died with DT LVAD, and 1 caregiver of a patient who had declined DT L

144 therapy left ventricular assist devices (DT LVADs) are one of the most invasive medical intervention

145 Of 89 patients who died with a DT-LVAD, the median (25th-75th percentile) time from left v

146 lar assist device as destination therapy (DT-LVAD) to prolong survival for many patients with advance

147 All patients undergoing DT-LVAD at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota, from Ja

148 es and to determine whether patients with DT-LVAD are receiving optimal end-of-life care.

149 rt failure population, most patients with DT-LVAD die in the hospital and few use hospice.

150 ntual end-of-life care that patients with DT-LVAD receive.

151 Primary implantation of a durable LVAD in well-selected myocardial infarction shock patien

152 Durable LVADs included 108 Heartmate II (HM II) and 105 HeartWar

153 m humans before LVAD implantation and during LVAD support (n=41).

154 isk of bleeding and thrombotic events during LVAD support differs by patient demographics, including

155 njection of 25 million MPCs or medium during LVAD implantation.

156 unadjusted risk of waitlist mortality during LVAD support, which was mitigated by adjusting for incre

157 transplant outcomes that was not seen during LVAD support before HT.

158 st implantation had superior survival during LVAD support.

159 ignificantly associated with survival during LVAD support.

160 e experiencing more frequent adverse events, LVAD patients improved more in HRQol and depression.

161 tly higher in healthy controls and explanted LVAD patients compared with other patients (healthy 5.35

162 amples from 101 patients with heart failure, LVAD, or orthotopic heart transplantation.

163 was found to be noninferior to an axial-flow LVAD with respect to survival free from disabling stroke

164 a small, intrapericardial, centrifugal-flow LVAD was found to be noninferior to an axial-flow LVAD w

165 .0 years), 7 patients with a continuous-flow LVAD (HF+LVAD group: mean, 57.7+/-5.6 years), and 3 nonf

166 , and sheep supported with a continuous-flow LVAD (n=9 LVAD, n=11 control).

167 Among continuous-flow LVAD patients without aortic valve opening, there are ch

168 tation centers, totaling 295 continuous-flow LVAD recipients with >/=2 cholesterol values available.

169 Initiation of continuous-flow LVAD support was associated with significant recovery of

170 vascularity develops during continuous-flow LVAD support.

171 ata indicated that prolonged continuous-flow LVAD unloading does not induce hypertrophy regression to

172 quiring durable support with continuous-flow LVAD were prospectively evaluated with serial echocardio

173 patients-18 implanted with a continuous-flow LVAD, 16 patients with LVAD explanted (recovered patient

174 , and sheep supported with a continuous-flow LVAD.

175 ple species supported with a continuous-flow LVAD.

176 second and third-generation, continuous flow LVADs, along with improved survival rates in patients re

177 th the introduction of newer continuous flow LVADs, with lower morbidity, neurological events, pump f

178 ients implanted with durable continuous-flow LVADs as bridge to transplant, destination therapy, or b

179 failure patients unloaded by continuous-flow LVADs has not been studied.

180 METHODS AND A single-center continuous flow-LVAD database (n=354) was used to identify patients with

181 Of 9976 patients undergoing continuous-flow-LVAD implantation, 386 patients (3.9%) required an RVAD

182 upport who underwent primary continuous-flow-LVAD surgery were examined for concurrent or subsequent

183 social workers' psychosocial assessments for LVAD patients and (2) determine how these attributes ass

184 Adults who met contemporary criteria for LVAD implantation for permanent use were eligible to par

185 0 patients), in patients being evaluated for LVAD/transplant (20 patients), for stabilization pending

186 analysis, 12-month survival was greater for LVAD versus OMM (80 +/- 4% vs. 63 +/- 5%; p = 0.022) pat

187 ass IIIB/IV patients meeting indications for LVAD destination therapy but not dependent on intravenou

188 nts not on inotropes who met indications for LVAD implantation, comparing the effectiveness of HeartM

189 Furthermore, plasma from LVAD patients contained higher amounts of thrombin (P=0.

190 Plasma from LVAD patients induced more Ang-2 gene expression in endo

191 cular function while temporarily weaned from LVAD support (90 days after randomization).

192 ied without treatment and 2 were weaned from LVAD.

193 Compared with HF, the aortic walls from HF+LVAD had an increase in wall thickness, collagen, and sm

194 as revealed increased vessel stiffness in HF+LVAD compared with HF and nonfailing.

195 , 7 patients with a continuous-flow LVAD (HF+LVAD group: mean, 57.7+/-5.6 years), and 3 nonfailing do

196 0 kPa in the HF to 201.7+/-36.4kPa in the HF+LVAD groups (P<0.001).

197 ith worse outcomes in patients with the HMII LVAD, PeAF may be associated with increased mortality an

198 roved functional status was better with HMII LVAD compared with OMM.

199 is study was to evaluate HeartMate II (HMII) LVAD support versus optimal medical management (OMM) in

200 g the efficacy and risk profile of the HM II LVAD.

201 rmation formation and subsequent bleeding in LVAD patients.

202 Adverse events in LVAD patients remain high.

203 te that thrombin-induced Ang-2 expression in LVAD patients leads to increased angiogenesis in vitro a

204 dothelial expression of Ang-2 were higher in LVAD patients (P=0.001 and P<0.001, respectively).

205 Adverse events were higher in LVAD patients, at 1.89 events/patient-year (EPPY), prima

206 The study included LVAD recipients registered in the Interagency Registry f

207 Compared with patients receiving an isolated LVAD, patients requiring RVAD had decreased 1- and 6-mon

208 Like heart failure itself, LVADs influence multiple biological systems.

209 However, stroke (a well-known LVAD complication) and subclinical cerebral ischemia may

210 the progress made toward achieving lifelong LVAD support and the challenges that remain.

211 More LVAD patients met the primary endpoint (39% LVAD vs. 21%

212 We compared a newer LVAD design (a small intrapericardial centrifugal-flow d

213 .53; P=0.005) and increased risk of nonfatal LVAD-related complications, including a composite of str

214 area under the curve=0.71; P<0.001) but not LVAD-free survival (hazard ratio=1.41; P=0.097; ROC area

215 ts (3.9%) required an RVAD within 14 days of LVAD surgery.

216 end point of RVAD or death within 14 days of LVAD were assessed with stepwise logistic regression.

217 bsequent RVAD implantation within 14 days of LVAD.

218 It specifically focuses on impacts of LVAD-related mechanical stress on VWF structural stabili

219 ecutive adults who underwent implantation of LVAD from 2007 to 2016.

220 enrolled; 54 underwent 8.0 +/- 1.2 months of LVAD unloading.

221 ventricular samples collected at the time of LVAD implantation (pre-LVAD) and at the time of explanta

222 An intact t-system at the time of LVAD implantation may constitute a precondition and pred

223 receptor-sarcolemma distances at the time of LVAD implantation predicted high post-LVAD left ventricu

224 th acceptable quality of life at the time of LVAD implantation.

225 r than tricuspid valve repair at the time of LVAD.

226 sion making concerning the use and timing of LVAD therapy in heart failure patients who are symptom l

227 eveloping optimal diagnosis and treatment of LVAD-related thrombosis.

228 ined for the main components of each type of LVAD.

229 ents at different rates based on the type of LVAD.

230 We identified 3 types of LVAD-related blood flow obstruction, and developed an al

231 Benefits of LVADs are often presented in the absence of risks, alter

232 s with chronic HF undergoing implantation of LVADs.

233 n (4 patients), in patients who were offered LVAD but chose inotropes (15 patients), and for palliati

234 combined end point of death or delisting on LVAD support (P=0.30).

235 investigate the effect of ICM HF etiology on LVAD-associated improvement of cardiac structure and fun

236 anges in VWF reactivity found in patients on LVAD support.

237 iation or those who preferred inotropes over LVAD had median survival of 9.0 months (interquartile ra

238 e calibration for survival but overestimated LVAD-free survival.

239 bridging decompensated patients to permanent LVAD or heart transplantation.

240 riding desire to live as long as possible: "[LVAD] was the only option I had...that or push up daisie

241 -LVAD) and at the time of explantation (post-LVAD).

242 ime of LVAD implantation predicted high post-LVAD left ventricular ejection fractions (P<0.01) and ej

243 hange from pre implantation to 3 months post-LVAD implantation, had significantly better unadjusted s

244 1.5 and 6.3+/-1.4 after 3 and 12 months post-LVAD, respectively; P<0.0001) and a significant reductio

245 se attributes associated with patients' post-LVAD placement mortality and Interagency Registry for Me

246 crimination and underestimated survival post-LVAD implantation.

247 We found that post-LVAD hearts showed up to a 60% decrease in mitochondrial

248 axia telangiectasia mutated foci in the post-LVAD hearts.

249 Aurora B-positive cardiomyocytes in the post-LVAD hearts.

250 ease in hemoglobin A1c levels (7.4+/-1.9 pre-LVAD versus 6.0+/-1.5 and 6.3+/-1.4 after 3 and 12 month

251 lected at the time of LVAD implantation (pre-LVAD) and at the time of explantation (post-LVAD).

252 ease in cardiomyocyte size compared with pre-LVAD hearts.

253 Ejection fraction in patients with pre-LVAD ryanodine receptor-sarcolemma distances >1 microm d

254 cidence of cardiac recovery with an a priori LVAD implantation strategy of bridge-to-recovery (BTR) a

255 inotropes, 23 were transplanted, 32 received LVADs, and 50 remained on inotropes.

256 evice malfunctions (DMs) occurring in rotary LVADs implanted at a single center between April 2004 an

257 ARS suggests a 24% probability of successful LVAD explantation.

258 Successful temporary LVAD weaning was achieved in 50% of MPC and 20% of contr

259 These are the first direct evidence that LVAD support causes gastrointestinal angiodysplasia.

260 It has been speculated that LVAD support itself may cause angiodysplasia.

261 In the LVAD cohort, the HMRS had marginal discrimination at 3 (

262 In the LVAD explanted group, 38% of the patients achieved peak

263 rior to and >/=90 days post-placement in the LVAD group.

264 ts (n = 8) and healthy donors (n = 8) in the LVAD study (NCT02174133, NCT01799005).

265 d by echocardiography during turndown of the LVAD.

266 e with obstruction of blood flow through the LVAD with the purpose of developing optimal diagnosis an

267 sufficiently to allow explantation of their LVAD can even achieve cardiac and physical functional ca

268 nts who instead received destination therapy-LVAD are estimated to live 4.4 years on average from ext

269 y of life are needed for destination therapy-LVAD to be cost effective.

270 ent patients compared with those assigned to LVAD (58+/-7% versus 82+/-5%; P=0.004).

271 enation-supported ablation was the bridge to LVAD in 6.9% and to heart transplantation in 3.5% of pat

272 igher in patients with end-stage HF prior to LVAD placement and decreased significantly post-implanta

273 gies and are markedly altered in response to LVAD support.

274 Bridge to transplant-LVAD followed by OHT further is estimated to increase li

275 tients who are not candidates for transplant/LVAD is modestly better than previously reported, but re

276 laced on inotropes as a bridge to transplant/LVAD, 55 were successfully maintained on inotropes until

277 opes are effective as a bridge to transplant/LVAD.

278 lly maintained on inotropes until transplant/LVAD.

279 ardium was obtained from subjects undergoing LVAD placement and/or heart transplantation.

280 y Assisted Circulatory Support who underwent LVAD implantation between May 2012 and December 2013, co

281 o platelets and subendothelial collagen upon LVAD implantation, leading to the term acquired von Will

282 e and adhesive activity recover quickly upon LVAD explantation and are not observed in patients with

283 5.35 +/- 0.95 W; explanted 3.45 +/- 0.72 W; LVAD implanted 2.37 +/- 0.68 W; and HTx 1.31 +/- 0.31 W;

284 thout DM after LVAD implantation and whether LVAD support resulted in a better control of DM.

285 th right heart catheterization, during which LVAD speeds were adjusted.

286 Patients were censored for death with LVAD at the time of transplant or the last day of the st

287 ischarge until the earliest among death with LVAD, transplant, or the last day of the study (December

288 le quality of life was also more likely with LVAD versus optimal medical management if baseline VAS w

289 ICM) and 5 (NICM) miRNAs are normalized with LVAD.

290 ximately 10% are improved or normalized with LVAD.

291 Blood flow abnormalities in patients with LVAD (n = 524) were identified and classified as "high-p

292 ith a continuous-flow LVAD, 16 patients with LVAD explanted (recovered patients), and 24 heart transp

293 Among 1638 patients with LVAD, 29.7% had a poor outcome, with death in 22.4% and

294 In patients supported with LVAD for at least 6 months, we found that 5% of subjects

295 ogenic potential of serum from patients with LVADs (P<0.001), which was normalized with Ang-2 blockad

296 Patients with LVADs are at high risk for ventricular arrhythmias.

297 or, angiopoietin-2 (Ang-2), in patients with LVADs leads to increased angiogenesis and higher nonsurg

298 AND In this prospective study, patients with LVADs underwent routine invasive hemodynamic ramp testin

299 ociated with worse outcomes in patients with LVADs.

300 proved from baseline more significantly with LVADs than with OMM (Delta visual analog scale: 29 +/- 2