CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

A volumetric intravascular ultrasound comparison of early drug-eluting stent thrombosis versus restenosis Five-Year Outcomes of Transcatheter or Surgical Aortic-Valve Replacement Economic and Quality-of-Life Outcomes of Natriuretic Peptide–Guided Therapy for Heart Failure Prognostic implications of baseline 6‐min walk test performance in intermediate risk patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement Cardiac and Kidney Benefits of Empagliflozin in Heart Failure Across the Spectrum of Kidney Function: Insights From EMPEROR-Reduced The conductive function of biopolymer corrects myocardial scar conduction blockage and resynchronizes contraction to prevent heart failure Impact of Lesion Preparation Strategies on Outcomes of Left Main PCI: The EXCEL Trial Outcomes 2 Years After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients at Low Surgical Risk Chimney technique in a TAVR-in-TAVR procedure with high risk of left main artery ostium occlusion INTERMACS Profiles and Outcomes Among Non–Inotrope-Dependent Outpatients With Heart Failure and Reduced Ejection Fraction

Expert Opinion2018 Apr 3;71(13):1483-1493.

JOURNAL:J Am Coll Cardiol. Article Link

Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices in Patients With Left Ventricular Assist Systems

Berg DD, Vaduganathan M, Stewart GC et al. Keywords: advanced heart failure; implantable cardioverter-defibrillator; left ventricular assist system; mechanical circulatory support; permanent pacemaker

ABSTRACT


Recent progress and evolution in device engineering, surgical implantation practices, and periprocedural management have advanced the promise of durable support with left ventricular assist systems (LVAS) in patients with stage D heart failure. With greater uptake of LVAS globally, a growing population of LVAS recipients have pre-existing cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs). Strategies for optimal clinical management of CIEDs in patients with durable LVAS are evolving, and clinicians will increasingly face complex decisions regarding implantation, programming, deactivation, and removal of CIEDs. Traditional decision-making pathways for CIEDs may not apply to LVAS-supported patients, as few patients die of arrhythmic causes and many arrhythmias may be well tolerated. Given limited data, treatment decisions must be individualized and made collaboratively among electrophysiologists, advanced heart failure specialists, and patients and their caregivers. Large, prospective, well-conducted studies are needed to better understand the contemporary utility of CIEDs in patients with newer-generation LVAS.