Disclosures. No disclosures to report

Similar documents
Multicenter Study of MagLev Technology in Patients Undergoing Mechanical Circulatory Support Therapy with HeartMate 3 (MOMENTUM 3) Long Term Outcomes

A Fully Magnetically Levitated Left Ventricular Assist Device. Final Report of the MOMENTUM 3 Trial

Contemporary Advanced Heart Failure Therapy

Recent Trials With Durable LVADs: Is There a Superior Device?

HEARTMATE 3 LEFT VENTRICULAR ASSIST SYSTEM

Ventricular Assist Devices for Permanent Therapy: Current Status and Future

HEARTMATE 3 LVAD WITH FULL MAGLEV FLOW TECHNOLOGY THEIR FUTURE STARTS WITH YOU

LVAD Complications, Recovery

Overview of MCS in Bruce B Reid, MD Surgical Director Artificial Heart Program/Heart Transplantation

MCSD Pump Thrombosis : Industry Perspective

Ventricular Assist Device: Are Early Interventions Superior? Hamang Patel, MD Section of Cardiomyopathy & Heart Transplantation

Complications of Left Ventricular Assist Device Chronic Support. Dr. Tal Hasin RMC, Beilinson, Petach-Tiqva, Israel

Mechanical Cardiac Support in Acute Heart Failure. Michael Felker, MD, MHS Associate Professor of Medicine Director of Heart Failure Research

Destination Therapy SO MUCH DATA IN SUCH A SMALL DEVICE. HeartWare HVAD System The ONLY intrapericardial VAD approved for DT.

Table S1: Diagnosis and Procedure Codes Used to Ascertain Incident Hip Fracture

Chapter 8: Cardiovascular Disease in Patients with ESRD

Concomitant Aortic Valve Procedures in Patients Undergoing Implantation of Continuous-Flow LVADs: An INTERMACS Database Analysis

End Stage Heart Failure - Time to Bring the Hammer Down

Journal of the American College of Cardiology Vol. 60, No. 1, by the American College of Cardiology Foundation ISSN /$36.

Further devices to treat heart failure

Randomized comparison of single versus double mammary coronary artery bypass grafting: 5 year outcomes of the Arterial Revascularization Trial

Analysis of Pump Thrombosis in the Intermacs Database

Mechanical Circulatory Support in the Management of Heart Failure

Risk Factors for Adverse Outcome after HeartMate II Jennifer Cowger, MD, MS St. Vincent Heart Center of Indiana

Modern Left Ventricular Assist Devices (LVAD) : An Intro, Complications, and Emergencies

UNIVERSITY OF UTAH HEALTH CARE HOSPITALS AND CLINICS

A Fully Magnetically Levitated Circulatory Pump for Advanced Heart Failure

EMS: Care of the VAD Patient. Brittany Butzler BSN RN VAD Coordinator Froedtert and the Medical College of WI

EMS and Nursing Considerations in VAD Patient Care

Medical Therapy after LVAD

HeartWare ADVANCE Bridge to Transplant Trial and Continued Access Protocol Update

Diagnosis of Device Thrombosis

The Balancing Act Bleeding and Thrombosis in MCS. Muhammad Adil Soofi

Chapter 4: Cardiovascular Disease in Patients With CKD

Ventricular Assisting Devices in the Cathlab. Unrestricted

เอกราช อร ยะช ยพาณ ชย

The Counter HF Clinical Study for Heart Failure

Heart Failure Medical and Surgical Treatment

Two-Year Outcomes with a Magnetically Levitated Cardiac Pump in Heart Failure

LIVING A MORE ACTIVE LIFE. with the HeartMate 3 LVAD for the treatment of advanced heart failure RON. Recipient

Chapter 9: Cardiovascular Disease in Patients With ESRD

Table 1 Baseline characteristics of 60 hemodialysis patients with atrial fibrillation and warfarin use

Left Ventricular Assist Devices (LVADs): Overview and Future Directions

Dialysis-Dependent Cardiomyopathy Patients Demonstrate Poor Survival Despite Reverse Remodeling With Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy

Circulatory Support: From IABP to LVAD

Neprilysin Inhibitor (Entresto ) Prior Authorization and Quantity Limit Program Summary

Ventricular Assist Device. Lauren Bartlett 10/5/16 BME 281, section 1

None. Declaration of conflict of interest

Ventricular Assist Devices (VADs) and Percutaneous Cardiac Support Systems

A Validated Practical Risk Score to Predict the Need for RVAD after Continuous-flow LVAD

WHAT S NEW IN HEART FAILURE

Seventh INTERMACS annual report: 15,000 patients and counting

Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Therapy in MADIT II Patients with Signs and Symptoms of Heart Failure

Do we really need an Artificial Heart? No!! John V. Conte, MD, Professor of Surgery Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine

What has INTERMACS Taught Us about Patient Outcomes with Durable MCS? James K. Kirklin, MD

Supplementary Online Content

3/1/2017. Chronic Mechanical Support for Heart Failure. Heart Failure is a major driver of morbidity and mortality in the US 1-7

DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST

Diagnostic, Technical and Medical

New Trends and Indications for LVADs

Lessons learned from ENDURANCE, ROADMAP, MedaMACS, and how to go forward?

Chapter 4: Cardiovascular Disease in Patients with CKD

A new option for the Diagnosis and Management of Valvular Heart Disease. Oregon Comprehensive Valve Center

Rhythm Disorders 2017 TazKai LLC and NRSNG.com

USRDS UNITED STATES RENAL DATA SYSTEM

Strengthening Your VAD Program

I have no disclosures. Disclosures

Surgery and device intervention for the elderly with heart failure: assessing the need. Devices and Technology for heart failure in 2011

Remote management of heart failure using implanted devices and formalized follow-up procedures (REM-HF)

STATE OF OKLAHOMA 2014 EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES PROTOCOLS

Early Experience of Transcatheter Mitral Valve Replacement Results from the Intrepid Global Pilot Study

VAD come Destination therapy nell adulto con Scompenso Cardiaco

Fifth INTERMACS annual report: Risk factor analysis from more than 6,000 mechanical circulatory support patients

Integrating Innovative Technologies into the Care of Cardiac Patients

LVADs as a long term or destination therapy for the advanced heart failure

1/21/2016. HeartMate II Indications for Use. Ventricular Assist Device Overview. Jon G. Echterling MSN, CCRN, FNP-BC. Learning Objectives

Left Ventricular Assist Devices LVAD. North Country EMS Program Agency 3/21/12

Repeated Ramp Tests on Stable LVAD Patients Reveal Patient-Specific Hemodynamic Fingerprint

Acute heart failure: ECMO Cardiology & Vascular Medicine 2012

Quality Measures MIPS CV Specific

Aortic Insufficiency: How Often Does It Occur and When To Treat

Establishing a New Path Forward for Patients With Severe Symptomatic Aortic Stenosis THE PARTNER TRIAL CLINICAL RESULTS

C1: Medical Standards for Safety Critical Workers with Cardiovascular Disorders

Right Ventricular Failure: Prediction, Prevention and Treatment

Biatrial Maze or PVI to Ablate Afib? Marc Gillinov, MD

Predicting Major Outcomes after MCSD Implant. Risk Factors for Death, Transplant, and Recovery. James Kirklin, MD David Naftel, PhD

Implantable Ventricular Assist Devices and Total Artificial Hearts. Policy Specific Section: June 13, 1997 March 29, 2013

Mechanics of Cath Lab Support Devices

Race Original cohort Clean cohort HR 95%CI P HR 95%CI P. <8.5 White Black

Mechanical Circulatory Support (MCS) in 2017: What is New and Different?

Medical Policy An independent licensee of the Blue Cross Blue Shield Association

Advances in Advanced Heart Failure Therapies. Disclosures. Management Algorithm for Patients in Cardiogenic Shock

1. Whether the risks of stent thrombosis (ST) and major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) differ from BMS and DES

DISCLOSURES ACHIEVING SUCCESS THROUGH FAILURE: UPDATE ON HEART FAILURE WITH PRESERVED EJECTION FRACTION NONE

ECMO as a Bridge to Heart Transplant in the Era of LVAD s.

Supplementary Online Content

Three-Year Clinical Outcomes with Everolimus-Eluting Bioresorbable Scaffolds: Results from the Randomized ABSORB III Trial Stephen G.

Implantable Ventricular Assist Devices and Total Artificial Hearts

Intraaortic Balloon Counterpulsation- Supportive Data for a Role in Cardiogenic Shock ( Be Still My Friend )

Transcription:

Disclosures No disclosures to report

Update on MOMENTUM 3 Trial: The Final Word? Francis D. Pagani MD PhD Otto Gago MD Professor of Cardiac Surgery University of Michigan Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA

LVAD Therapy LVAD demonstrated to have significant survival and quality of life benefits Now exceeds heart transplantation in number of procedures Further adoption into less ill patients is limited by significant adverse events related to device hemocompatibility Stroke Device thrombosis Bleeding

Pump Design Mechanical pivot design Associated with pump thrombosis Small gaps high shear stresses and blood trauma

HeartMate III: Full MagLev Technology I: Full MagLev Technology Key Design Benefits: Optimized Geometry Key Design Benefits: Optimized Geometry I secondary flow paths are ~0.5 mm along the side, and ~1.0 HeartMate III above secondary flow paths are ~0.5 mm along the side, and ~1.0 mm pump and below the rotor. mm pump above and below the rotor. I pump surfaces are flat and flow is undisturbed. I pump surfaces are flat and flow is undisturbed. ~ 1.0 mm ~ 1.0top mmand top bottom and bottom ~ 0.5 mm ~ 0.5 mm the along along the side side

Artificial Pulse Functions to promoting better washing of blood pump and prevent areas of statsis While unproven, augmenting the pulsatility that is generally diminished in rotary pump patients may have benefit for some patients or in certain circumstances, perhaps in part addressing adverse events such as; aortic insufficiency, bleeding and thrombogenesis rotor speed [rpm] rotor speed [rpm] FS FS = Fixed Speed (set by clinician) FS+2000 FS FS-2000 time [s] 0.15 0.20 time [s] 2.00 6

MOMENTUM 3 versus Mehra MR, et al; for the MOMENTUM 3 investigators. N Engl J Med. 2018.

MOMENTUM Long Term Cohort 2-Year Followup Patient meets MOMENTUM 3 eligibility criteria? Randomization 1:1 Short Term (ST) Cohort 1 N=294 6-month follow-up Additional 72 patients enrolled Long Term (LT) Cohort N=366 2-year follow-up Full Cohort N=1028 2-year follow-up Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Population N=366 Withdrawn before implant N = 1 Death: 1 Per Protocol Population N=361 Pump N=190 Implanted with N=189 Pump N=176 Implanted with N=172 Withdrawn before implant N = 4 No LVAD implant: 1 Withdrawal of consent: 1 Transplant: 1 Implanted with non-study LVAD: 1 1 Mehra et al. A Fully Magnetically. Levitated Circulatory Pump for Advanced Heart Failure. N Engl J Med 2017;376(5):440-50. 8

Study Aim and Primary Endpoint Study Aim The long-term (2-year) study is designed to ascertain success to optimally support patients who wait for extended periods for heart transplantation or are ineligible for heart transplantation (e.g., destination therapy) Primary Endpoint Survival at 2 years free of disabling stroke (>3 modified Rankin Score) or reoperation to replace or remove a malfunctioning device Mehra MR, et al; for the MOMENTUM 3 investigators. N Engl J Med. 2018. 9

MOMENTUM 3 Baseline Characteristics Characteristic (n=190) (n=176) Age - years Mean 61 ± 12 59 ± 12 Median (range) 65 (19-81) 61 (24-84) Male sex - no. (%) 150 (78.9) 143 (81.2) Race or ethnic group - no. (%) White 127 (66.8) 131 (74.4) Black or African American 52 (27.4) 32 (18.2) Other* 11 (5.8) 13 (7.4) Body surface area - m 2 2.1 ± 0.3 2.1 ± 0.3 Ischemic cause of heart failure - no. (%) 80 (42.1) 88 (50.0) History of atrial fibrillation - no. (%) 81 (42.6) 83 (47.2) History of stroke - no. (%) 16 (8.4) 20 (11.4) Previous cardiac surgical procedure - no. (%) Coronary-artery bypass 44 (23.2) 41 (23.3) History of valve replacement or repair 18 (9.5) 7 (4.0) Concomitant medication or intervention - no (%) Intravenous inotropic agents 167 (87.9) 152 (86.4) Diuretic 166 (87.4) 165 (93.8) ACE inhibitor or Angiotensin II-receptor antagonist 58 (30.5) 66 (37.5) Beta-blocker 111 (58.4) 98 (55.7) CRT/CRT-D 75 (39.5) 62 (35.2) ICD/CRT-D 122 (64.2) 123 (69.9) IABP 25 (13.2) 26 (14.8) There were significant differences between groups for history of valve replacement or repair (P=0.04) and diuretic use (P=0.05). *Includes Asian, Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islanders, and other. CRT(-D) denotes cardiac resynchronization therapy with or without defibrillator; ICD, implantable cardioverter-defibrillator; IABP, intraaortic balloon pump. 10

Patients with Event-free Survival (%) Primary End Point Analysis (ITT) Survival at 2 years free of disabling stroke (>3 mrs) or reoperation to replace or remove a malfunctioning device 100 90 80 70 60 50 87.3% 80.5% 84.4% 73.6% 77.9% 56.4% 40 30 20 10 Superiority Analysis Hazard ratio, 0.46 (95% CI, 0.31-0.69) P<0.001 by log-rank test No. at Risk mrs denotes modified Rankin Score; CI, confidence interval 0 0 6 12 18 24 Months Since Implantation 190 176 161 134 141 114 Mehra MR, et al; for the MOMENTUM 3 investigators. N Engl J Med. 2018. 122 90 111 75 11

Primary Endpoints Mehra MR, et al; for the MOMENTUM 3 investigators. N Engl J Med. 2018.

Primary Endpoint Component 1 Overall Survival No. at Risk HR denotes hazard ratio; CI, confidence interval 13 Mehra MR, et al; for the MOMENTUM 3 investigators. N Engl J Med. 2018.

Primary Endpoint Component 2 Freedom from Disabling Stroke (mrs > 3) No. at Risk HR denotes hazard ratio; CI, confidence interval Mehra MR, et al; for the MOMENTUM 3 investigators. N Engl J Med. 2018. 14

All Stroke Events and Severity Mehra MR, et al; for the MOMENTUM 3 investigators. N Engl J Med. 2018.

Primary Endpoint Component 3 Freedom from Reoperation to Replace or Remove Pump Freedom from Reoperation to Replace or Remove Pump No. at Risk 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0 6 12 18 24 189 172 98.8% 98.8% 92.5% HR = 0.10 (95%CI: 0.03-0.27) P<0.0001 by log-rank test 164 135 86.6% Months After Implant 145 114 126 90 97.2% 75.5% 114 76 There was a ten-fold difference in the reoperation rate between and reoperations were due to infection (1), electrical fault (1), and outflow-graft twist (1) 2/3 rd of reoperations were due to pump thrombosis or severe hemolysis HR denotes hazard ratio, CI, confidence interval Mehra MR, et al; for the MOMENTUM 3 investigators. N Engl J Med. 2018.

Lactate Dehydrogenase (LDH) Levels over Time

Key Adverse Events Pump Thrombosis, Neurological Events, Bleeding Suspected or confirmed pump thrombosis n (%) (n=189) no. of Events n (%) (n=172) no. of Events HR (95% CI) P Value* 2 (1.1) 2 27 (15.7) 33 0.06 (0.01-0.26) <0.001 Resulting in reoperation 0 (0) 0 21 (12.2) 25 NA <0.001 Any stroke 19 (10.1) 22 33 (19.2) 43 0.47 (0.27-0.84) 0.02 Ischemic stroke 12 (6.3) 14 23 (13.4) 26 0.44 (0.22-0.88) 0.03 Hemorrhagic stroke 8 (4.2) 8 16 (9.3) 17 0.42 (0.18-0.98) 0.06 Other neurologic event + 22 (11.6) 25 15 (8.7) 16 1.27 (0.66-2.45) 0.39 Bleeding 81 (42.9) 187 90 (52.3) 206 0.71 (0.53-0.96) 0.07 Bleeding that led to surgery 23 (12.2) 29 30 (17.4) 34 0.66 (0.38-1.13) 0.18 Gastrointestinal bleeding 51 (27.0) 107 47 (27.3) 100 0.92 (0.62-1.37) 1.00 HR denotes hazard ratio; CI, confidence interval *P values were calculated with the use of Fisher s exact test. + Includes transient ischemic attacks and neurologic events other than stroke Mehra MR, et al; for the MOMENTUM 3 investigators. N Engl J Med. 2018. 18

Functional Status and Quality of Life *P-value between treatment arms over time 20 **P-value for treatment over time Mehra MR, et al; for the MOMENTUM 3 investigators. N Engl J Med. 2018.

Competing Outcomes

Conclusions The LVAS is clinically superior when compared to the axial-flow pump, at 2-years These benefits were primarily driven by a lower reoperation rate in the arm largely due to excess device malfunctions resulting from pump thrombosis in the LVAS A markedly lower rate of stroke was observed with the LVAS Same clinical benefit/ outcomes derived for patients identified as BTT, BTC, and DT 22