Background: Minimally invasive surgery for left ventricular assist device implantation may have advantages over conventional sternotomy (CS). Additionally, ultra-fast-track anesthesia has been linked to better outcomes after cardiac surgery. This study summarizes our early experience of combining minimally invasive surgery with ultra-fast-track anesthesia (MIFTA) in patients receiving HeartMate 3 devices and compares the outcomes between MIFTA and CS.
Methods: From October 2015 to January 2019, 18 of 49 patients with Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support profiles >1 underwent MIFTA for HeartMate 3 implantation. For bias reduction, propensity scores were calculated and used as a covariate in a regression model to analyze outcomes. Weighted parametric survival analysis was performed.
Results: In the MIFTA group, intensive care unit stays were shorter (mean difference, 8 days [95% CI, 4-13]; P<0.001), and the incidences of pneumonia and right heart failure were lower than those in the CS group (odds ratio, 1.36 [95% CI, 1.01-1.75]; P=0.016, respectively). At 6 and 12 hours postoperatively, MIFTA patients had a better hemodynamic performance with lower pulmonary wedge pressure (mean difference, 2.23 mm Hg [95% CI, 0.41-4.06]; P=0.028) and a higher right ventricular stroke work index (mean difference, -1.49 g·m/m2 per beat [95% CI, -2.95 to -0.02]; P=0.031). CS patients had a worse right heart failure-free survival rate (hazard ratio, 2.35 [95% CI, 0.96-5.72]; P<0.01).
Conclusions: Compared with CS, MIFTA is a beneficial approach for non-Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support 1 HeartMate 3 patients with lower adverse event incidences, better hemodynamic performance, and preserved right heart function. Future large multicentric investigations are required to verify MIFTA's effects on outcomes.
Keywords: heart-assist devices; humans; pilot projects; propensity score; sternotomy.