Literature DB >> 11295583

Cardiac transplant outcome of patients supported on left ventricular assist device vs. intravenous inotropic therapy.

B E Jaski1, J C Kim, D C Naftel, J Jarcho, M R Costanzo, H J Eisen, J K Kirklin, R C Bourge.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although the left ventricular assist device (LVAD) has been increasingly used as a bridge to transplant, its effect on post-transplant outcome is uncertain. We, therefore, designed this study using the Cardiac Transplant Research Database to compare patients supported on an LVAD before transplant with those treated with intravenous inotropic medical therapy. METHODS AND
RESULTS: Of the 5,880 patients transplanted between 1990 and 1997, a total of 502 received support from LVADs and 2,514 received intravenous inotropic medical therapy at the time of transplant. Kaplan-Meier analysis showed no significant difference in post-transplant survival between the LVAD and medical-therapy groups (p = 0.09). Results of a multivariate Cox regression analysis were consistent with that of the Kaplan-Meier analysis and did not identify LVAD as a significant risk factor for mortality. The percentage of patients who received LVADs as a function of total transplants increased from 2% in 1990 to 16% in 1997. Furthermore, although the number of extracorporeal LVADs remained relatively constant, the number of intracorporeal LVADs increased over time. Multivariate parametric analysis found that the risk factors for post-transplant death in the LVAD group were extracorporeal LVAD use (p = 0.0004), elevated serum creatinine (p = 0.05), older donor age (p = 0.03), increased donor ischemic time (p < 0.0001), and earlier year of transplant (p = 0.03).
CONCLUSIONS: Given a limited donor supply, the intracorporeal LVAD helps the sickest patients survive to transplant and provides post-transplant outcome similar to that of patients supported on inotropic medical therapy. Therefore, patients supported on LVADs before transplant may receive the greatest marginal benefit when compared with other transplant candidates.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11295583     DOI: 10.1016/s1053-2498(00)00246-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Heart Lung Transplant        ISSN: 1053-2498            Impact factor:   10.247


  10 in total

Review 1.  A ventricular assist device as a bridge to recovery, decision making, or transplantation in patients with advanced cardiac failure.

Authors:  Siyamek Neragi-Miandoab
Journal:  Surg Today       Date:  2012-07-20       Impact factor: 2.549

2.  Pre-operative and post-operative risk factors associated with neurologic complications in patients with advanced heart failure supported by a left ventricular assist device.

Authors:  Tomoko S Kato; P Christian Schulze; Jonathan Yang; Ernest Chan; Khurram Shahzad; Hiroo Takayama; Nir Uriel; Ulrich Jorde; Maryjane Farr; Yoshifumi Naka; Donna Mancini
Journal:  J Heart Lung Transplant       Date:  2011-10-08       Impact factor: 10.247

3.  Effects of continuous-flow versus pulsatile-flow left ventricular assist devices on myocardial unloading and remodeling.

Authors:  Tomoko S Kato; Aalap Chokshi; Parvati Singh; Tuba Khawaja; Faisal Cheema; Hirokazu Akashi; Khurram Shahzad; Shinichi Iwata; Shunichi Homma; Hiroo Takayama; Yoshifumi Naka; Ulrich Jorde; Maryjane Farr; Donna M Mancini; P Christian Schulze
Journal:  Circ Heart Fail       Date:  2011-07-15       Impact factor: 8.790

4.  Risk stratification of ambulatory patients with advanced heart failure undergoing evaluation for heart transplantation.

Authors:  Tomoko S Kato; Gerin R Stevens; Jeffrey Jiang; P Christian Schulze; Natalie Gukasyan; Matthew Lippel; Alison Levin; Shunichi Homma; Donna Mancini; Maryjane Farr
Journal:  J Heart Lung Transplant       Date:  2013-03       Impact factor: 10.247

Review 5.  Left ventricular assist devices as a bridge to cardiac transplantation.

Authors:  Christopher T Holley; Laura Harvey; Ranjit John
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2014-08       Impact factor: 2.895

6.  Left ventricular assist devices: an evidence-based analysis.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ont Health Technol Assess Ser       Date:  2004-03-01

7.  Preoperative serum albumin levels predict 1-year postoperative survival of patients undergoing heart transplantation.

Authors:  Tomoko S Kato; Faisal H Cheema; Jonathan Yang; Yumeko Kawano; Hiroo Takayama; Yoshifumi Naka; Maryjane Farr; David J Lederer; Matthew R Baldwin; Zhezhen Jin; Shunichi Homma; Donna M Mancini; P Christian Schulze
Journal:  Circ Heart Fail       Date:  2013-05-14       Impact factor: 8.790

8.  Ventricular assist devices or inotropic agents in status 1A patients? Survival analysis of the United Network of Organ Sharing database.

Authors:  Curtis J Wozniak; Josef Stehlik; Bradley C Baird; Stephen H McKellar; Howard K Song; Stavros G Drakos; Craig H Selzman
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  2014-01-11       Impact factor: 4.330

9.  Initial clinical experience with the HeartMate II axial-flow left ventricular assist device.

Authors:  O H Frazier; Courtney Gemmato; Timothy J Myers; Igor D Gregoric; Brano Radovancevic; Pranav Loyalka; Biswajit Kar
Journal:  Tex Heart Inst J       Date:  2007

Review 10.  Targeting the Innate Immune Response to Improve Cardiac Graft Recovery after Heart Transplantation: Implications for the Donation after Cardiac Death.

Authors:  Stefano Toldo; Mohammed Quader; Fadi N Salloum; Eleonora Mezzaroma; Antonio Abbate
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2016-06-17       Impact factor: 5.923

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.