Skip to main content
Log in

Left ventricular assist device-related infections: does the time of onset matter?

  • Original Article
  • Artificial Heart (Clinical)
  • Published:
Journal of Artificial Organs Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A frequent complication of left ventricular assist devices (LVAD) is the LVAD-associated infections (LVADIs). Contamination may occur during initial surgery/admission or at a later time. We studied the clinical manifestations and outcomes of LVADIs depending on the time of the onset. Patients implanted with LVADs at our institution between August 2009 and December 2014 were included. Patients were stratified into 2 groups based on whether the infection occurred early (< 180 days) or late (≥ 180 days) after LVAD implantation. Out of 37 overall LVADI episodes, 16 (43%) and 21 (57%) occurred early or late after device implantation, respectively. Median time to first LVADI was 88 ± 35 vs. 456 ± 187 days between groups. While superficial driveline-related infection was the most common LVADI type for both groups (56 vs. 71%, p = 0.489), driveline drainage was more prevalent in the late group (24 vs. 69%; p = 0.009). Early LVADIs involved more gram-positive flora, mostly Staphylococcus aureus (69 vs. 33%, p = 0.049), whereas late LVADIs involved more gram-negative pathogens, mostly Pseudomonas aueroginosa (25 vs. 57%; p = 0.045). High rates of treatment failure were consistent between groups (88 vs. 71%, p = 0.384). Compared with superficial LVADI, deeper infections were associated with an increase in mortality (13 vs 46%, p = 0.046). We concluded that early onset with likely in-hospital contamination involved more gram-positive flora, whereas late infection involved more gram-negative flora. Regardless of timing, success of antibacterial treatment was dismal, and infection depth correlated with poorer outcomes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Spelman D, Esmore D. Ventricular assist device infections. Curr Infect Dis Rep. 2012;14:359–66.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Simon D, Fischer S, Grossman A, et al. Left ventricular assist device-related infection: treatment and outcome. Clin Infect Dis. 2005;40:1108–15.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Rose EA, Gelijns AC, Moskowitz AL, et al. Long-term use of a left ventricular assist device for end-stage heart failure. N Eng J Med. 2001;345:1435–43.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Hannan MM, Husain S, Mattner F, et al. Working formulation for the standardization of definitions of infections in patients using ventricular assist devices. J Heart Lung Transpl. 2011;30:375–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Nienaber JJ, Kusne S, Riaz T, et al. Clinical manifestations and management of left ventricular assist device-associated infections. Clin Infect Dis. 2013;57:1438–48.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Leuck A. Left ventricular assist device driveline infections: recent advances and future goals. J Thorac Dis. 2015;7:2151–7.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Gordon RJ, Weinberg AD, Pagani FD, et al. Prospective, multicenter study of ventricular assist device infections. Circulation. 2013;127:691–702.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Donahey EE, Polly DM, Vega JD, et al. Multidrug-resistant organism infections in patients with left ventricular assist devices. Tex Heart Inst J. 2015;42:522–7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Goldstein DJ, Naftel D, Holman W, et al. Continuous-flow devices and percutaneous site infections: clinical outcomes. J Heart Lung Transpl. 2012;31:1151–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Moazami N, Milano CA, John R, et al. Pump replacement for left ventricular assist device failure can be done safely and is associated with low mortality. Ann Thorac Surg. 2013;95:500–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Anand J, Singh SK, Hernandez R, et al. Continuous-flow ventricular assist device exchange is safe and effective in prolonging support time in patients with end-stage heart failure. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2015;149:267– 75,278.e1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Bhatia N, Voelkel AJ, Hussain Z, et al. Safety and feasibility of induction immunosuppression when driveline infection is an indication for cardiac transplantation. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2015;63:675–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Trachtenberg BH, Cordero-Reyes A, Elias B, Loebe M. A review of infections in patients with left ventricular assist devices: prevention, diagnosis and management. Methodist Debakey Cardiovasc J. 2015;11:28–32.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Aburjania N, Sherazi S, Tchantchaleishvili V, Alexis JD, Hay CM. Stopping conventional showering decreases Pseudomonas infections in left ventricular assist device patients. Int J Artif Organs. 2017;40:282–285.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Maya E. Guglin.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lehnert, A.L., Hart, A., Brouse, S.D. et al. Left ventricular assist device-related infections: does the time of onset matter?. J Artif Organs 22, 98–103 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10047-018-1078-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10047-018-1078-6

Keywords

Navigation