OBJECTIVES: Recent analyses establish that heart transplantation is increasing among adults with congenital heart disease (ACHD), but the effects of pretransplant mechanical circulatory support (MCS) on perioperative and post-transplant outcomes have not been examined in the ACHD population. METHODS: Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients data on all adult heart transplants from September 1987 to September 2012 (n = 47 160) were classified based on primary diagnosis codes as CHD or non-CHD and MCS or non-MCS. Demographic, procedural, outcome and survival variables were compared between MCS and non-MCS ACHD patient groups. RESULTS: MCS was used in 83 (6.8%) ACHD patients compared with 8625 (18.8%) patients without CHD (P < 0.001). MCS as a fraction of ACHD transplants increased over time (P = 0.002). MCS patients spent more time on the wait list, had a higher baseline serum creatinine and were more likely to be male, status 1A, hospitalized, in the ICU and/or on a ventilator prior to transplant. However, MCS patients experienced equivalent short-term survival (30-day mortality = 10.8% in MCS vs 13.5% in non-MCS, P = 0.62) and overall survival by Kaplan-Meier analysis (P = 0.57). MCS patients had a longer post-transplant length of stay and were more likely to be transfused, but otherwise had no significant differences in adverse outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: MCS is less commonly used in adult CHD patients compared with all patients undergoing heart transplant, but has been increasing over time. Within the ACHD population, patients with MCS have a higher risk profile, but except for increased transfusion rate and longer length of stay, do not experience less favourable post-transplant outcomes.
OBJECTIVES: Recent analyses establish that heart transplantation is increasing among adults with congenital heart disease (ACHD), but the effects of pretransplant mechanical circulatory support (MCS) on perioperative and post-transplant outcomes have not been examined in the ACHD population. METHODS: Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients data on all adult heart transplants from September 1987 to September 2012 (n = 47 160) were classified based on primary diagnosis codes as CHD or non-CHD and MCS or non-MCS. Demographic, procedural, outcome and survival variables were compared between MCS and non-MCS ACHD patient groups. RESULTS:MCS was used in 83 (6.8%) ACHD patients compared with 8625 (18.8%) patients without CHD (P < 0.001). MCS as a fraction of ACHD transplants increased over time (P = 0.002). MCSpatients spent more time on the wait list, had a higher baseline serum creatinine and were more likely to be male, status 1A, hospitalized, in the ICU and/or on a ventilator prior to transplant. However, MCSpatients experienced equivalent short-term survival (30-day mortality = 10.8% in MCS vs 13.5% in non-MCS, P = 0.62) and overall survival by Kaplan-Meier analysis (P = 0.57). MCSpatients had a longer post-transplant length of stay and were more likely to be transfused, but otherwise had no significant differences in adverse outcomes. CONCLUSIONS:MCS is less commonly used in adult CHD patients compared with all patients undergoing heart transplant, but has been increasing over time. Within the ACHD population, patients with MCS have a higher risk profile, but except for increased transfusion rate and longer length of stay, do not experience less favourable post-transplant outcomes.
Authors: Jill M Steiner; Eric V Krieger; Karen K Stout; April Stempien-Otero; Claudius Mahr; Nahush A Mokadam; Joshua L Hermsen Journal: Int J Cardiol Date: 2017-08-02 Impact factor: 4.164
Authors: Marketa Hegarova; Jaroslav Brotanek; Milos Kubanek; Radka Kockova; Janka Franekova; Vera Lanska; Ivan Netuka; Vojtech Melenovsky; Ivan Malek; Josef Kautzner Journal: Croat Med J Date: 2016-08-31 Impact factor: 1.351
Authors: Evgenij V Potapov; Christiaan Antonides; Maria G Crespo-Leiro; Alain Combes; Gloria Färber; Margaret M Hannan; Marian Kukucka; Nicolaas de Jonge; Antonio Loforte; Lars H Lund; Paul Mohacsi; Michiel Morshuis; Ivan Netuka; Mustafa Özbaran; Federico Pappalardo; Anna Mara Scandroglio; Martin Schweiger; Steven Tsui; Daniel Zimpfer; Finn Gustafsson Journal: Eur J Cardiothorac Surg Date: 2019-08-01 Impact factor: 4.191