Literature DB >> 11726895

Multicenter clinical evaluation of the HeartMate vented electric left ventricular assist system in patients awaiting heart transplantation.

O H Frazier1, E A Rose, M C Oz, W Dembitsky, P McCarthy, B Radovancevic, V L Poirier, K A Dasse.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Despite advances in heart transplantation and mechanical circulatory support, mortality among transplant candidates remains high. Better ways are needed to ensure the survival of transplant candidates both inside and outside the hospital.
METHODS: In a prospective, multicenter clinical trial conducted at 24 centers in the United States, 280 transplant candidates (232 men, 48 women; median age, 55 years; range, 11-72 years) unresponsive to inotropic drugs, intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation, or both, were treated with the HeartMate Vented Electric Left Ventricular Assist System (VE LVAS). A cohort of 48 patients (40 men, 8 women; median age, 50 years; range, 21-67 years) not supported with an LVAS served as a historical control group. Outcomes were measured in terms of laboratory data (hemodynamic, hematologic, and biochemical), adverse events, New York Heart Association functional class, and survival.
RESULTS: The VE LVAS-treated and non-VE LVAS-treated (control) groups were similar in terms of age, sex, and distribution of patients by diagnosis (ischemic cardiomyopathy, idiopathic cardiomyopathy, and subacute myocardial infarction). VE LVAS support lasted an average of 112 days (range, < 1-691 days), with 54 patients supported for > 180 days. Mean VE LVAS flow (expressed as pump index) throughout support was 2.8 L x min(-1) x m(-2). Median total bilirubin values decreased from 1.2 mg/dL at baseline to 0.7 mg/dL (P =.0001); median creatinine values decreased from 1.5 mg/dL at baseline to 1.1 mg/dL (P =.0001). VE LVAS-related adverse events included bleeding in 31 patients (11%), infection in 113 (40%), neurologic dysfunction in 14 (5%), and thromboembolic events in 17 (6%). A total of 160 (58%) patients were enrolled in a hospital release program. Twenty-nine percent of the VE LVAS-treated patients (82/280) died before receiving a transplant, compared with 67% of controls (32/48) (P <.001). Conversely, 71% of the VE LVAS-treated patients (198/280) survived: 67% (188/280) ultimately received a heart transplant, and 4% (10/280) had the device removed electively. One-year post-transplant survival of VE LVAS-treated patients was significantly better than that of controls (84% [158/188] vs 63% [10/16]; log rank analysis P =.0197).
CONCLUSION: The HeartMate VE LVAS provides adequate hemodynamic support, has an acceptably low incidence of adverse effects, and improves survival in heart transplant candidates both inside and outside the hospital. The studies of the HeartMate LVAS (both pneumatic and electric) for Food and Drug Administration approval are the only studies with a valid control group to show a survival benefit for cardiac transplantation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11726895     DOI: 10.1067/mtc.2001.118274

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg        ISSN: 0022-5223            Impact factor:   5.209


  74 in total

Review 1.  Mechanical circulatory support for elderly heart failure patients.

Authors:  Craig R Butler; Bodh I Jugdutt
Journal:  Heart Fail Rev       Date:  2012-09       Impact factor: 4.214

Review 2.  Heart failure in women.

Authors:  J Julia Shin; Eman Hamad; Sandhya Murthy; Ileana L Piña
Journal:  Clin Cardiol       Date:  2012-03       Impact factor: 2.882

Review 3.  Physiologic and pathologic changes in patients with continuous-flow ventricular assist devices.

Authors:  Ranjit John; Andrew Boyle; Frank Pagani; Leslie Miller
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Transl Res       Date:  2009-03-04       Impact factor: 4.132

4.  Heart failure: Continuous-flow LVADs improve clinical outcomes.

Authors:  Yukihiko Nosé
Journal:  Nat Rev Cardiol       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 32.419

5.  Left Ventricular Assist Devices as Destination Therapy for End-stage Heart Failure.

Authors:  Lynne Warner Stevenson
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2004-12

Review 6.  Mechanical circulatory support devices (MCSD) in Japan: current status and future directions.

Authors:  Setsuo Takatani; Hikaru Matsuda; Akihisa Hanatani; Chisato Nojiri; Kenji Yamazaki; Tadashi Motomura; Katsuhiro Ohuchi; Tohru Sakamoto; Takashi Yamane
Journal:  J Artif Organs       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 1.731

7.  Waiting list mortality among children listed for heart transplantation in the United States.

Authors:  Christopher S D Almond; Ravi R Thiagarajan; Gary E Piercey; Kimberlee Gauvreau; Elizabeth D Blume; Heather J Bastardi; Francis Fynn-Thompson; T P Singh
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2009-01-26       Impact factor: 29.690

8.  Initial experiences with the HeartMate vented electric left ventricular assist system in Japan.

Authors:  Shunsuke Saito; Takeshi Nakatani; Kazuo Niwaya; Junjiro Kobayashi; Akihisa Hanatani; Osamu Tagusari; Hiroyuki Nakajima; Kunio Miyatake; Toshikatsu Yagihara; Soichiro Kitamura
Journal:  J Artif Organs       Date:  2007-06-20       Impact factor: 1.731

Review 9.  Devices in the management of advanced, chronic heart failure.

Authors:  William T Abraham; Sakima A Smith
Journal:  Nat Rev Cardiol       Date:  2012-12-11       Impact factor: 32.419

10.  Hemofiltration for hyperbilirubinemia after left ventricular assist system implantation: report of four cases.

Authors:  Shigeru Miyagawa; Motonobu Nishimura; Norihide Fukushima; Goro Matsumiya; Yuji Fujino; Hikaru Matsuda; Yoshiki Sawa
Journal:  Surg Today       Date:  2008-07-31       Impact factor: 2.549

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.