Left Ventricular Assist Device Flow Pattern Analysis Utilizing a Novel Computational Fluid Dynamics Model: Using Physics and Physiology to Better Define the Pump-Patient Interaction

Our current understanding of flow through the circuit of left ventricular assist device (LVAD), left ventricle and ascending aorta remains incompletely understood. Computational fluid dynamics, which allow for analysis of flow in the cardiovascular system, have been used for this purpose, although current simulation models have failed to fully incorporate the interplay between the pulsatile left ventricle and continuous-flow generated by the LVAD. Flow-through the LVAD is dependent on the interaction between device and patient-specific factors with suboptimal flow patterns evoking increased risk of LVAD-related complications. Computational fluid dynamics can be used to analyze how different pump and patient factors affect flow patterns in the left ventricle and the aorta. Computational fluid dynamics simulations were carried out on a patient with a HeartMate II. Simulations were also conducted for theoretical scenarios substituting HeartWare HVAD, HeartMate 3 (HM3) in continuous mode and HM3 with Artificial Pulse. An anatomical model of the patient was reconstructed from computed tomography (CT) images, and the LVAD outflow was used as the inflow boundary condition. The LVAD outflow was calculated separately using a lumped-parameter-model of the systemic circulation, which was calibrated to the patient based on the patient-specific ventricular volume change reconstructed from 4 dimensional computed tomography and pulmonary capillary wedge pressure tracings. The LVADs were implemented in the lumped-parameter-model via published pressure head versus flow (H-Q) curves. To quantify the flushing effect, virtual contrast agent was released in the ascending aorta and its flushing over the cycles was quantified. Shear stress acting on the aortic endothelium and shear rate in the bloodstream were also quantified as indicators of normal/abnormal blood flow, especially the latter being a biomarker of platelet activation and hemolysis. LVAD speeds for the HVAD and HM3 were selected to match flow rates for the patient's HMII (9,000 RPM for HMII, 5,500 RPM for HM3, and 2,200 RPM for HVAD), the cardiac outputs were 5.81 L/min, 5.83 L/min, and 5.92 L/min, respectively. The velocity of blood flow in the outflow cannula was higher in the HVAD than in the two HeartMate pumps with a cycle average (range) of 0.92 m/s (0.78-1.19 m/s), 0.91 m/s (0.86-1.00 m/s), and 1.74 m/s (1.40-2.24 m/s) for HMII, HM3, and HVAD, respectively. Artificial pulse increased the peak flow rate to 9.84 L/min for the HM3 but the overall cardiac output was 5.96 L/min, which was similar to the continuous mode. Artificial pulse markedly decreased blood stagnation in the ascending aorta; after six cardiac cycles, 48% of the blood was flushed out from the ascending aorta under the continuous operation mode while 60% was flushed under artificial pulse. Shear stress and shear rate in the aortic arch were higher with the HVAD compared to the HMII and HM3, respectively (shear stress: 1.76 vs. 1.33 vs. 1.33 Pa, shear rate: 136 vs. 91.5 vs. 89.4 s-1). Pump-specific factors such as LVAD type and programmed flow algorithms lead to unique flow patterns which influence blood stagnation, shear stress, and platelet activation. The pump-patient interaction can be studied using a novel computational fluid dynamics model to better understand and potentially mitigate the risk of downstream LVAD complications.

Systolic Nonclosure of the Mitral Valve: Two Left Ventricular Assist Device Patients with Pan-Cardiac Cycle Mitral Valve Opening During Shock States

Aortic regurgitation during continuous-flow left ventricular assist device support: An insufficient understanding of an insufficient lesion

Validation of continuous thermodilution cardiac output in patients implanted with a left ventricular assist device

Pulsatility and flow patterns across macro- and microcirculatory arteries of continuous-flow left ventricular assist device patients

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Left Ventricular Assist Devices and Aortic Regurgitation—Single Institution Retrospective Analysis

Left ventricle (LV) unloading caused by a left ventricular assist device (LVAD) has been shown to enhance reverse LV remodeling in end-stage cardiomyopathy. Several reports consistently suggest that a pulsatile-flow LVAD has more profound effects compared to continuous-flow LVAD, though the responsible mechanisms are not fully understood. We hypothesized that arterial pulsatility, being affected by the type of LVAD, may affect microvasculature and functional/pathological LV remodeling in end-stage cardiomyopathy. The study included 18 patients with chronic heart failure who underwent LVAD implantation. Eight patients were implanted with pulsatile-flow LVAD, and 10 patients were implanted with continuous-flow LVAD. The results of serial echocardiograms and histopathological assessment of transmural LV tissues, which were collected during the implantation and removal of LVADs, were compared between the groups. The results of echocardiography showed that LV systolic dimension and LV ejection fraction improved greatly in the pulsatile-flow LVAD group compared to the continuous-flow LVAD group. Histological analysis showed that in both groups, increased microvasculature density and decreased cardiomyocyte size during LVAD support had no significant difference. In contrast, only the patients with continuous-flow LVADs had presented with significant increase in α-smooth muscle actin (α-SMA)-positive layer thickness and the number of proliferating cell nuclear antigen (PCNA)-positive cells of myocardial arterioles. We concluded that the use of long-term continuous-flow LVAD support, having less pulsatility, had induced more thickening to the medial layer of myocardial arterioles compared to the use of pulsatile-flow LVADs. Our findings suggest that the pathological impairment of myocardial microvascular structure during continuous-flow LVAD support may be a novel mechanism which accounts for the difference in LV remodeling depending on the type of LVAD.

Left ventricular assist device (LVAD) has been saving many lives in patients with severe left ventricular (LV) failure. Recently, a minimally invasive transvascular LVAD such as Impella enables us to support unstable hemodynamics in severely ill patients. Although LVAD support increases total LV cardiac output (COTLV) at the expense of decreases in the native LV cardiac output (CONLV), the underlying mechanism determining COTLV remains unestablished. This study aims to clarify the mechanism and develop a framework to predict COTLV under known LVAD flow (COLVAD). We previously developed a generalized framework of circulatory equilibrium that consists of the integrated CO curve and the VR surface as common functions of right atrial pressure (PRA) and left atrial pressure (PLA). The intersection between the integrated CO curve and the VR surface defines circulatory equilibrium. Incorporating LVAD into this framework indicated that LVAD increases afterload, which in turn decreases CONLV. The total LV cardiac output (COTLV) under LVAD support becomes COTLV = CONLV+EFe · COLVAD, where EFe is effective ejection fraction, i.e., Ees/(Ees+Ea). Ees and Ea represent LV end-systolic elastance (Ees) and effective arterial elastance (Ea), respectively. In other words, LVAD shifts the total LV cardiac output curve upward by EFe · COLVAD. In contrast, LVAD does not change the VR surface or the right ventricular CO curve. In six anesthetized dogs, we created LV failure by the coronary ligation of the left anterior descending artery and inserted LVAD by withdrawing blood from LV and pumping out to the femoral artery. We determined the parameters of the CO curve with a volume-change technique. We then changed the COLVAD stepwise from 0 to 70–100 ml/kg/min and predicted hemodynamics by using the proposed circulatory equilibrium. Predicted COTLV, PRA, and PLA for each step correlated well with those measured (SEE; 2.8 ml/kg/min 0.17 mmHg, and 0.65 mmHg, respectively, r2; 0.993, 0.993, and 0.965, respectively). The proposed framework quantitatively predicted the upward-shift of the total CO curve resulting from the synergistic effect of LV systolic function and LVAD support. The proposed framework can contribute to the safe management of patients with LVAD.

<i>Circulation: Cardiovascular Interventions</i> Editors’ Picks

Prognostic Impact of Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators in Patients with Continuous Flow Left Ventricular Assist Devices

Left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) comprise a primary treatment choice for advanced heart failure patients. Treatment with LVAD is commonly associated with complications like stroke and gastro-intestinal (GI) bleeding, which adversely impacts treatment outcomes, and causes fatalities. The etiology and mechanisms of these complications can be linked to the fact that LVAD outflow jet leads to an altered state of hemodynamics in the aorta as compared to baseline flow driven by aortic jet during ventricular systole. Here, we present a framework for quantitative assessment of aortic hemodynamics in LVAD flows realistic human vasculature, with a focus on quantifying the differences between flow driven by LVAD jet and the physiological aortic jet when no LVAD is present. We model hemodynamics in the aortic arch proximal to the LVAD outflow graft, as well as in the abdominal aorta away from the LVAD region. We characterize hemodynamics using quantitative descriptors of flow velocity, stasis, helicity, vorticity and mixing, and wall shear stress. These are used on a set of 27 LVAD scenarios obtained by parametrically varying LVAD outflow graft anastomosis angles, and LVAD flow pulse modulation. Computed descriptors for each of these scenarios are compared against the baseline flow, and a detailed quantitative characterization of the altered state of hemodynamics due to LVAD operation (when compared to baseline aortic flow) is compiled. These are interpreted using a conceptual model for LVAD flow that distinguishes between flow originating from the LVAD outflow jet (and its impingement on the aorta wall), and flow originating from aortic jet during aortic valve opening in normal physiological state.

Left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) are frequently used as a bridge to cardiac transplantation and may be useful as long-term therapy. The purpose of this study was to compare the exercise performance of LVAD patients with that of ambulatory heart failure patients. Exercise testing with hemodynamic and respiratory gas measurements was performed in 65 congestive heart failure (CHF) patients (age 53+/-10 years) and 20 LVAD patients (age 49+/-8 years). Peak Vo2 was significantly higher in the LVAD than the CHF patients (CHF, 12+/-3; LVAD, 15. 9+/-3.8 mL . kg-1 . min-1; P<0.001), as was the Vo2 at the anaerobic threshold (CHF, 8.1+/-2.1; LVAD, 12.2+/-2.9 mL . kg-1 . min-1; P<0.001). At rest, mean arterial blood pressure (CHF, 87+/-11; LVAD, 94+/-9 mm Hg) and cardiac output (CHF, 4+/-1; LVAD, 4. 9+/-0.9 L/min) were increased, whereas mean pulmonary artery pressure (CHF, 28+/-11; LVAD, 18+/-4 mm Hg) and pulmonary artery wedge pressure (CHF, 16+/-10; LVAD 5+/-3 mm Hg) were reduced (all P<0.01). At peak exercise, heart rate (CHF,125+/-24; LVAD, 148+/-24 bpm), blood pressure (CHF, 87+/-14; LVAD,96+/-12 mm Hg), and cardiac output (CHF, 7.6+/-2.2; LVAD, 11.2+/-2.6 L/min) were higher (all P<0. 01), whereas mean pulmonary artery pressure (CHF, 48+/-12; LVAD, 30+/-5 mm Hg) and mean pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (CHF, 31+/-11; LVAD, 14+/-6 mm Hg) were lower in the LVAD group (both P<0. 001). In the LVAD patients, Fick cardiac output was higher than LVAD flow sensor value measurements (Fick, 11.6+/-2.5; LVAD, 8.1+/-1.2 L/min; P<0.001). Hemodynamic measurements at rest and during exercise are significantly improved in patients with devices compared with those in ambulatory heart failure patients awaiting cardiac transplantation. Similarly, the exercise capacity of device patients is better than that of transplant candidates and in the majority of patients is similar to that of patients with mild CHF.

The aim of this study was to elucidate the dynamic characteristics of the Thoratec HeartMate II (HMII) and the HeartWare HVAD (HVAD) left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) under clinically representative in vitro operating conditions. The performance of the two LVADs were compared in a normothermic, human blood-filled mock circulation model under conditions of steady (nonpulsatile) flow and under simulated physiologic conditions. These experiments were repeated using 5% dextrose in order to determine its suitability as a blood analog. Under steady flow conditions, for the HMII, approximately linear inverse LVAD differential pressure (H) versus flow (Q) relationships were observed with good correspondence between the results of blood and 5% dextrose under all conditions except at a pump speed of 9000 rpm. For the HVAD, the corresponding relationships were inverse curvilinear and with good correspondence between the blood-derived and 5% dextrose-derived relationships in the flow rate range of 2-6 L/min and at pump speeds up to 3000 rpm. Under pulsatile operating conditions, for each LVAD operating at a particular pump speed, an counterclockwise loop was inscribed in the HQ domain during a simulated cardiac cycle (HQ loop); this showed that there was a variable phase relationship between LVAD differential pressure and LVAD flow. For both the HMII and HVAD, increasing pump speed was associated with a right-hand and upward shift of the HQ loop and simulation of impairment of left ventricular function was associated with a decrease in loop area. During clinical use, not only does the pressure differential across the LVAD and its flow rate vary continuously, but their phase relationship is variable. This behavior is inadequately described by the widely accepted representation of a plot of pressure differential versus flow derived under steady conditions. We conclude that the dynamic HQ loop is a more meaningful representation of clinical operating conditions than the widely accepted steady flow HQ curve.

Successful Conversion of TandemHeart Left Ventricular Assist Device to Right Ventricular Assist Device After Implantation of a HeartMate XVE

Recurrent orthostatic syncope due to left atrial and left ventricular collapse after a continuous-flow left ventricular assist device implantation