OBJECTIVES: A post-approval (PA) study for destination therapy (DT) was required by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to determine whether results with the HeartMate (HM) II (Thoratec, Pleasanton, California) left ventricular assist device (LVAD) in a commercial setting were comparable to results during the DT multicenter pivotal clinical trial. BACKGROUND: New device technology developed in the clinical research setting requires validation in a real-world setting. METHODS: The PA study was a prospective evaluation of the first 247 HM II patients identified pre-operatively as eligible for DT in the national INTERMACS (Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support) registry. Patients were enrolled from January to September 2010 at 61 U.S. centers and followed for 2 years. A historical comparison group included patients (n = 133 at 34 centers) enrolled in the primary data cohort in the DT pivotal trial (TR). Survival rates and adverse events for the PA group were obtained from the INTERMACS registry. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were similar for PA versus TR. Forty-five percent of PA patients were in INTERMACS profiles 1 to 2 and 28% were in profile 3. Adverse events in the PA group were similar or lower than those in the TR group, including improvements in device-related infection (0.22 vs. 0.47) and post-operative bleeding requiring surgery (0.09 vs. 0.23) events per patient-year. Kaplan-Meier survival at 2 years was 62% (PA group) versus 58% (TR group). PA group survival at 1 and 2 years was 82 ± 5% and 69 ± 6% for INTERMACS profiles 4 to 7 (n = 63) versus 72 ± 3% and 60 ± 4% for profiles 1 to 3 (n = 184). The median length of stay after surgery was reduced by 6 days in the PA group versus the TR group. CONCLUSIONS: Results in a commercial patient care setting for the DT population supported the original pivotal clinical trial findings regarding the efficacy and risk profile of the HM II LVAD. Survival was best in patients who were not inotrope-dependent (INTERMACS profiles 4 to 7).
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES: A post-approval (PA) study for destination therapy (DT) was required by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to determine whether results with the HeartMate (HM) II (Thoratec, Pleasanton, California) left ventricular assist device (LVAD) in a commercial setting were comparable to results during the DT multicenter pivotal clinical trial. BACKGROUND: New device technology developed in the clinical research setting requires validation in a real-world setting. METHODS: The PA study was a prospective evaluation of the first 247 HM II patients identified pre-operatively as eligible for DT in the national INTERMACS (Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support) registry. Patients were enrolled from January to September 2010 at 61 U.S. centers and followed for 2 years. A historical comparison group included patients (n = 133 at 34 centers) enrolled in the primary data cohort in the DT pivotal trial (TR). Survival rates and adverse events for the PA group were obtained from the INTERMACS registry. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were similar for PA versus TR. Forty-five percent of PA patients were in INTERMACS profiles 1 to 2 and 28% were in profile 3. Adverse events in the PA group were similar or lower than those in the TR group, including improvements in device-related infection (0.22 vs. 0.47) and post-operative bleeding requiring surgery (0.09 vs. 0.23) events per patient-year. Kaplan-Meier survival at 2 years was 62% (PA group) versus 58% (TR group). PA group survival at 1 and 2 years was 82 ± 5% and 69 ± 6% for INTERMACS profiles 4 to 7 (n = 63) versus 72 ± 3% and 60 ± 4% for profiles 1 to 3 (n = 184). The median length of stay after surgery was reduced by 6 days in the PA group versus the TR group. CONCLUSIONS: Results in a commercial patient care setting for the DT population supported the original pivotal clinical trial findings regarding the efficacy and risk profile of the HM II LVAD. Survival was best in patients who were not inotrope-dependent (INTERMACS profiles 4 to 7).
Authors: Emily P Zeitler; Sana M Al-Khatib; Joseph P Drozda; Larry G Kessler; Ajay J Kirtane; David F Kong; John Laschinger; Danica Marinac-Dabic; Marie-Claude Morice; Terrie Reed; Art Sedrakyan; Kenneth M Stein; James Tcheng; Mitchell W Krucoff Journal: Am Heart J Date: 2015-07-30 Impact factor: 4.749
Authors: Melissa A H Witman; Ryan S Garten; Jayson R Gifford; H Jonathan Groot; Joel D Trinity; Josef Stehlik; Jose N Nativi; Craig H Selzman; Stavros G Drakos; Russell S Richardson Journal: JACC Heart Fail Date: 2015-08-12 Impact factor: 12.035
Authors: Sarah T Ward; Qixing Liang; Francis D Pagani; Min Zhang; Robert L Kormos; Keith D Aaronson; Andrew D Althouse; Brahmajee K Nallamothu; Donald S Likosky Journal: J Heart Lung Transplant Date: 2017-06-23 Impact factor: 10.247
Authors: Mathew S Maurer; Evelyn Horn; Alex Reyentovich; Victoria Vaughan Dickson; Sean Pinney; Deena Goldwater; Nathan E Goldstein; Omar Jimenez; Sergio Teruya; Jeff Goldsmith; Stephen Helmke; Melana Yuzefpolskaya; Gordon R Reeves Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2017-09-21 Impact factor: 5.562