Background: End-stage heart failure is associated with high mortality. Recent developments such as the left ventricular assist device (LVAD) have improved patient outcomes. The HeartMate 3 LVAD is a novel centrifugal pump that was developed to provide hemodynamic support in heart failure patients, either as a bridge-to-transplant (BTT), myocardial recovery, or destination therapy (DT). Our objective was to evaluate the survival rates and LVAD-related complications of the HeartMate 3 LVAD before and after hospital discharge in our center. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed all patients implanted with the HeartMate 3 LVAD in our institute between September 2015 and June 2024. Patients who received a Heart Ware Ventricular Assist Device (HVAD) and HeartMate 2 LVAD devices were excluded. The primary endpoint was survival before and after hospital discharge. The secondary endpoints included an incidence of serious LVAD adverse events (bleeding, major infection, hemolysis, device thrombosis and malfunction, and neurological dysfunction) and the causes of re-admission along the follow-up period. Results: A total of 48 consecutive HeartMate 3 LVAD patients were enrolled in this study. The mean age was 56.1 ± 10.6 years. A total of 72.9% of patients received LVAD therapy as a BTT, 14.6% as DT, 10.4% as a bridge-to-decision, and 2.1% as a bridge-to-recovery. A total of 85.4% of patients were discharged after implantation. The main cause for in-hospital mortality was right ventricular failure (8.3%), followed by stroke, abdominal bleeding, and multi-organ failure (2.1% each). One patient (2.1%) had successful heart transplantation, 26 patients (63.4%) are still on LVAD support, and 11 (26.8%) patients have died during follow-up. The main cause of mortality after hospital discharge was sepsis, which occurred in 9.8% of patients, followed by right ventricular failure, non-LVAD-related causes, unknown causes with two (4.9%) cases each, and one case of fatal stroke (2.4%). During the follow-up, there was no need for LVAD replacement. Conclusions: HeartMate 3 LVAD is associated with excellent in-hospital survival rates in patients with end-stage heart failure. Right ventricular failure was the main cause of death before hospital discharge, whereas sepsis was the main cause of death after hospital discharge.

Background/Objectives: The frozen elephant trunk (FET) technique is a cornerstone procedure for complex thoracic aortic pathologies. This single-center retrospective study evaluates early and midterm outcomes of total arch replacement (TAR) using three generations of the E-vita Open hybrid prosthesis over 11 years. Methods: From January 2013 to June 2024, 51 patients underwent TAR with the FET technique using the E-vita Open prostheses. Exclusion criteria were isolated ascending or descending aortic replacement, partial arch replacement, TAR without FET, and use of other stent grafts. We analyzed outcomes including in-hospital mortality, survival, stroke, spinal cord injury, and renal complications across three prosthesis generations. Results: The cohort included 52.9% males, with a mean age of 61.5 ± 10.51 years. FET as reoperation was performed in 52.9% patients. In-hospital mortality was 7.8% and, unexpectedly, only occurred with the newest E-vita Open Neo (23.5%), despite this being the latest generation. Overall survival was 72.5% at one year, 60.8% at two years, and 54.9% at three years. Stroke occurred in 17.6% with marked variation by pathology: 0% in dissection, 31.6% in aneurysm, and 13.6% in combined disease. Spinal cord injury occurred in 7.8%. Re-operation was a significant risk factor for complications and was strongly associated with renal complications (85.7% of dialysis patients) but not mortality. Secondary endovascular procedures were required in 49% of patients. Conclusions: The FET technique with E-vita Open prostheses demonstrates acceptable outcomes in high-risk patients with complex aortic pathologies. While perioperative morbidity is significant, particularly in reoperative cases, it varies significantly by underlying pathology and prosthesis generation, with unexpected trends suggesting that technological advancement does not automatically translate into improved outcomes. Despite this, the procedure enables comprehensive management of extensive aortic disease through a staged approach.

Background/Objectives: Total arch replacement (TAR) with frozen elephant trunk (FET) using the E-vita Open hybrid prosthesis represents a complex surgical intervention for extensive aortic pathologies in previously operated patients. The comparative safety profile between patients with previous acute Type A dissection repair versus other cardiac surgical histories remains unclear. This pilot study evaluated early and midterm outcomes to determine whether previous aortic dissection carries additional operative risk compared to other previous cardiac operations. Methods: This retrospective single-center pilot cohort study analyzed 27 patients who underwent TAR with E-vita Open hybrid prosthesis between January 2013 and June 2024. Patients were stratified into two groups: Group 1 comprised patients with previous acute Type A dissection repair (n = 15, 55.6%), and Group 2 included patients with other previous cardiac operations (n = 12, 44.4%). Primary endpoints were in-hospital mortality and survival at 1, 2, and 3 years. Secondary endpoints included major neurological complications, spinal cord injury, reoperation for bleeding, and freedom from aortic reinterventions. Results: Baseline characteristics demonstrated comparable risk profiles between groups, with similar EuroSCORE II values (median 4.55 [IQR 3.86–7.28] vs. 5.41 [IQR 3.93–6.74], p = 1.0). Despite Group 1 showing trends toward longer operative times (580.07 ± 126.84 vs. 481.25 ± 119.29 min, p = 0.053), major postoperative outcomes were statistically equivalent. In-hospital mortality was 6.7% in Group 1 versus 0% in Group 2 (p = 1.0). Stroke rates were comparable (20.0% vs. 25.0%, p = 1.0), as were paraplegia rates (13.3% vs. 8.3%, p = 1.0) and dialysis requirements (46.7% vs. 41.7%, p = 0.334). Survival rates at 1, 2, and 3 years were 80.0%, 66.7%, and 60.0% for Group 1 and 75.0%, 66.7%, and 50.0% for Group 2, respectively (all p > 0.05). Conclusions: This pilot study suggests preliminary evidence of comparable early and midterm outcomes between patients with previous Type A dissection repair and those with other previous cardiac operations when undergoing TAR with E-vita Open hybrid prosthesis at an experienced center. However, the small sample size limits definitive conclusions and highlights the need for larger multicenter studies to confirm these findings.