Objective The HeartMate II (HM II) and the HVAD are routinely used as LVADs. The aim of this study was to compare the two devices regarding their outcome and perioperative complications.

Methods 100 consecutive LVADs (51 HM II vs 49 HVAD) were implanted in patients with the age range 30-65 in our institution from 06.2006 to 09.2012. Perioperative parameters (98 variables) and outcome were analyzed for both groups.

Results There were no statistically significant differences in the baseline data except for higher bilirubin levels in HMII group (p=0.006). Support duration, inotropic and ventilation requirements, intensive care unit stay, postoperative additional mechanical circulatory support, rate of respiratory and renal failure as well as perioperative laboratory profiles were similar. HM II was associated with longer postoperative inhospital stay (p=0.039) and higher transfusion requirements with FFPs (p=0.038) and cryoprecipitated antihaemophilic factor (p=0.004). There were no significant differences in mortality on support (p=0.76), transplantation rate (p=0.374) and necessity of LVAD exchange due to device failure (p=0.803). The number of patients who recovered on support and were explanted was significantly higher in the HM II group (p=0.03). The number of patients with driveline infections (p=0.02) was significantly higher in the HM II group.

Conclusion HM II and HVAD provide similar postoperative outcome as a bridge to transplantation. Although, HM II implantation may be more invasive and carries higher risk of driveline infections it is associated with higher rate of myocardial recovery and VAD explantation in middle aged collective.

« Back to 2013 American Transplant Congress