Association of device surface and biomaterials with immunologic sensitization after mechanical support Isaac George, MD, Patrick Colley, BS, Mark J.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Adult-age donors offer acceptable long-term survival to pediatric heart transplant recipients: An analysis of the United Network of Organ Sharing database.

Advertisements

Manuel J. Antunes, MD, PhD, DSc

Stephen R. Broderick, MD, MPHS

A hybrid configuration of a left ventricular assist device and venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation Louis Samuels, MD, Eric Gnall, DO, Elena.

Long-term mechanical circulatory support: A new disease state?

Minimally invasive left ventricular assist device implantation with outflow graft anastomosis to the innominate artery Jasmin S. Hanke, MD, Sebastian.

A meta-analysis of comparative studies of endovascular versus open repair for blunt thoracic aortic injury Hisato Takagi, MD, PhD, Norikazu Kawai, MD,

Shinichi Fukuhara, MD, Koji Takeda, MD, PhD, Paul A

The RECOVER I: A multicenter prospective study of Impella 5

Characterization of ventricular assist device–mediated sensitization in the bridge-to- heart-transplantation patient Murray H. Kwon, MD, Jennifer Q. Zhang,

Direct aortic transcatheter aortic valve implantation for pure aortic valve regurgitation after implantation of a left ventricular assist device René.

Effects on pre- and posttransplant pulmonary hemodynamics in patients with continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices Ranjit John, MD, Kenneth Liao,

Centers for Disease Control “increased-risk” organ donor: Not so risky? Francis D. Pagani, MD, PhD The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery

Standard versus bicaval techniques for orthotopic heart transplantation: An analysis of the United Network for Organ Sharing database Ryan R. Davies,

Elucidating the intricate mechanisms of gastrointestinal bleeding in a continuous-flow left ventricular assist device will lead to future therapeutic.

Victor van Berkel, MD, PhD

Outcomes of contemporary mechanical circulatory support device configurations in patients with severe biventricular failure Allison P. Levin, BA, MSc,

In vitro hemodynamic characterization of HeartMate II at 6000 rpm: Implications for weaning and recovery Gengo Sunagawa, MD, Nicole Byram, BS, Jamshid.

Right ventricular failure in patients with the HeartMate II continuous-flow left ventricular assist device: Incidence, risk factors, and effect on outcomes

Intra-aortic balloon pump therapy negatively affects flow through a continuous-flow left ventricular assist device Dipanjan Banerjee, MD, MS, Chun Choi,

Mechanical circulatory assist device development at the Texas Heart Institute: A personal perspective O.H. Frazier, MD The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular.

Tomasz A. Timek, MD, Robert L

Risk-corrected impact of mechanical versus bioprosthetic valves on long-term mortality after aortic valve replacement Ole Lund, MD, PhD, Martin Bland,

The lord of the rings Antonio Miceli, MD, PhD

Expanding left ventricular assist device use to patients with disabilities: The role of assistive technology Juan A. Crestanello, MD The Journal of.

Intra-aortic balloon pumps and continuous flow left ventricular assist devices: Don't let balloon pumps overstay their welcome Kevin G. Soucy, PhD, Steven.

Aditya K. Kaza, MD The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery

Long-term outcome of patients on continuous-flow left ventricular assist device support Koji Takeda, MD, PhD, Hiroo Takayama, MD, PhD, Bindu Kalesan,

Adverse events in contemporary continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices: A multi- institutional comparison shows significant differences John M.

Left ventricular assist device therapy in a patient with hearing and speech disabilities Sotirios Spiliopoulos, MD, PhD, Vera Hergesell, MD, Otto Dapunt,

Abdul Rahman Dakkak, MD, Angelo M. Dell'Aquila, MD, Juergen R

Ranjit John, MD, Yoshifumi Naka, MD, Soon J

It's not “just a shunt” but sometimes it should be…

A first start for lung transplantation?

Right ventricular failure after cardiac surgery: Why can't right ventricular assist device support fix the problem? Francis D. Pagani, MD, PhD The Journal.

Stephen R. Broderick, MD, MPHS

Successful combined procedure of HeartMate II left ventricular assist device implantation and minimally invasive transapical aortic valve replacement

Durability of left ventricular assist devices: Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support (INTERMACS) 2006 to 2011 William L.

William L. Holman, MD, James K. Kirklin, MD, David C

Assessment of platelet function with light transmission aggregometry in 24 patients supported with a continuous-flow left ventricular assist device: A.

Fenton H. McCarthy, MD, MS, Nimesh D. Desai, MD, PhD

Niv Ad, MD, Lawrence M. Wei, MD

Anticoagulation with apixaban in a patient with a left ventricular assist device and gastrointestinal bleeding: A viable alternative to warfarin? Francesco.

Passing the torch The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery

Patrick T. Roughneen, MD, Grant T. Fankhauser, MD, Abe DeAnda, MD

Left ventricular assist device implantation after acute anterior wall myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock: A two-center study Nicholas C. Dang,

Is severe right ventricular failure in left ventricular assist device recipients a risk factor for unsuccessful bridging to transplant and post-transplant.

Insertion of a left ventricular assist device in patients without thorough transplant evaluations: a worthwhile risk? Mathew Williams, MD, Jennifer Casher,

The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery

Discussion The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery

The future of cardiac surgery training: A survival guide

Ventricular assistant in restrictive cardiomyopathy: Making the right connection Robert D.B. Jaquiss, MD The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery

The effect of ischemic time on survival after heart transplantation varies by donor age: An analysis of the United Network for Organ Sharing database

The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery

Cerebrovascular accidents in patients with a ventricular assist device

James W. Long, MD, PhD, Aaron H. Healy, BS, Brad Y

Seeing is believing: A call for routine early postoperative hemodynamic transesophageal echocardiography monitoring after left ventricular assist device.

The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery

“The more things change…”: The challenges ahead

Optimal timing for heart transplantation in patients bridged with left ventricular assist devices: Is timing of the essence? Chase R. Brown, MD, Fabliha.

Should heart transplantation be considered as a treatment option for patients aged 70 years and older? Jeffrey A Morgan, MD, Ranjit John, MD, Donna M.

Daisuke Yoshioka, MD, Hiroo Takayama, MD, Arthur R. Garan, MD, Veli K

Proactive or reactive? Best approach to limb ischemia in peripheral venoarterial extracorporeal life support Matthew C. Black, MD, Mark S. Slaughter,

Of mice and men… The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery

Gastrointestinal bleeding after left ventricular assist device implantation: It is all about the platelets Juan A. Crestanello, MD The Journal of Thoracic.

Did you like Terminator 3 better than Terminator 2

Durability and clinical impact of tricuspid valve procedures in patients receiving a continuous-flow left ventricular assist device Jiho Han, BS, Koji.

How do we follow up our patients

Lessons learned from Melody valve retrieved at transplantation

Prevalence and risks of allosensitization in HeartMate left ventricular assist device recipients: The impact of leukofiltered cellular blood product transfusions

Presentation transcript:

Association of device surface and biomaterials with immunologic sensitization after mechanical support Isaac George, MD, Patrick Colley, BS, Mark J. Russo, MD, Timothy P. Martens, MD, Elizabeth Burke, MS, Mehmet C. Oz, MD, Mario C. Deng, MD, Donna M. Mancini, MD, Yoshifumi Naka, MD, PhD The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery Volume 135, Issue 6, Pages 1372-1379.e1 (June 2008) DOI: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2007.11.049 Copyright © 2008 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery Terms and Conditions

Figure 1 A, Overall percentage of patients sensitized at any time during left ventricular assist device support by device type. Asterisk indicates P = .025 versus HeartMate I. HMI, HeartMate I; HMII-DB, HeartMate II or DeBakey. B, Percentage of sensitized patients before transplant (P = .590). HMI, HeartMate I; HMII-DB, HeartMate II or DeBakey. The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery 2008 135, 1372-1379.e1DOI: (10.1016/j.jtcvs.2007.11.049) Copyright © 2008 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery Terms and Conditions

Figure 2 A, Percentage of patients sensitized during first 3 months of left ventricular assist device (LVAD) support by device type. Asterisk indicates P < .001 versus HeartMate I at 1 month; dagger indicates P = .021 versus HeartMate I at 3 months. HMI, HeartMate I; HMII-DB, HeartMate II or DeBakey. B, Mean peak panel reactive antibody (PRA) levels during first 3 months of left ventricular assist device (LVAD) support and before transplant by device type (HeartMate II or DeBakey vs HeartMate I, P = .09 at 3 months). HMI, HeartMate I; HMII-DB, HeartMate II or DeBakey. C, Acute rejection within first 9 months after transplant was increased after HeartMate I (HMI) support versus HeartMate II or DeBakey (HMII-DB) support when examining all patients undergoing transplant. Asterisk indicates P = .052 versus HeartMate I. The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery 2008 135, 1372-1379.e1DOI: (10.1016/j.jtcvs.2007.11.049) Copyright © 2008 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery Terms and Conditions