@article{10.37349/ec.2024.00029,
abstract = {Aim: Temporary right ventricular assist device (t-RVAD) is an option for those patients in right ventricular failure (RVF) after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) resistant to ionotropic therapy. There are two options to placing a t-RVAD: an open, central technique or a percutaneous placement with Protek Duo® cannula. Methods: We compare these two t-RVAD devices that treat RVF after LVAD placement. Between 2013–2019, 22 patients were identified needing t-RVAD support after LVAD placement. Fourteen patients had open/central while 8 patients had percutaneous right ventricular assist device (RVAD) support. Results: There was no difference in length of ICU stay (49 ± 32 days Protek Duo{\textregistered} vs. 45 ± 22 days “open”; P = 0.73); hospital length of stay (57 ± 39 days vs. 55 ± 28 days; P = 0.088); discharge from ICU and hospital (62.1% Protek Duo{\textregistered} vs. 57% for “open”; P = 0.9 for both); or the one-year survival between the two groups (62% Protek Duo{\textregistered} vs. 50% “open”; P = 0.67). The Protek Duo{\textregistered} group had less total time on the ventilator (15 ± 9 days vs. 27 ± 17 days; P = 0.044) and required less amount of blood products (17 ± 8.9 units RBC and 2.0 ± 1.91 units FFP vs. 31 ± 20.5 units RBC and 11.5 ± 10 units FFP; P = 0.046 and P = 0.005). Conclusions: Percutaneous t-RVAD support is a viable option for patients whom undergo LVAD placement and require right ventricular mechanical support.},
author = {Prasad, Amit and Kronfli, Anthony and Assiaoui, Nadia and Brehm, Christoph and Soleimani, Behzad},
doi = {10.37349/ec.2024.00029},
journal = {Exploration of Cardiology},
pages = {158--167},
title = {{Percutaneous versus open cannulation for mechanical support in patients with right ventricular failure after left ventricular assist device placement}},
url = {https://www.explorationpub.com/Journals/ec/Article/101229},
volume = {2},
year = {2024},
number = {4}
}