Literature DB >> 25824553

Regional differences in use and outcomes of left ventricular assist devices: Insights from the Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support Registry.

Selim R Krim1, Rey P Vivo2, Patrick Campbell3, Jerry D Estep4, Gregg C Fonarow2, David C Naftel5, Hector O Ventura3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: We examined whether characteristics, implant strategy, and outcomes in patients who receive continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices (CF-LVAD) differ across geographic regions in the United States.
METHODS: A total of 7,404 CF-LVAD patients enrolled in the Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support (INTERMACS) from 134 participating institutions were analyzed from 4 distinct regions: Northeast, 2,605 (35%); Midwest, 2,210 (30%); West, 973 (13%); and South, 1,616 (22%).
RESULTS: At baseline, patients in the Northeast and South were more likely to have INTERMACS risk profiles 1 and 2. A bridge-to-transplant (BTT) strategy was more common in the Northeast (31.7%; West, 18.5%; South, 26.9%; Midwest, 25.5%; p < 0.0001). In contrast, destination therapy (DT) was more likely in the South (40.6%; Northeast, 32.3%; Midwest, 27.3%; West, 27.3%; p < 0.0001). Although all regions showed a high 1-year survival rate, some regional differences in long-term mortality were observed. Notably, survival beyond 1 year after LVAD implant was significantly lower in the South. However, when stratified by device strategy, no significant differences in survival for BTT or DT patients were found among the regions. Finally, with the exception of right ventricular failure, which was more common in the South, no other significant differences in causes of death were observed among the regions.
CONCLUSIONS: Regional differences in clinical profile and LVAD strategy exist in the United States. Despite an overall high survival rate at 1 year, differences in mortality among the regions were noted. The lower survival rate in the South may be attributed to patient characteristics and higher use of LVAD as DT.
Copyright © 2015 International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  INTERMACS; bridge to transplant; continuous-flow; destination therapy; left ventricular assist device; mechanical circulatory support; outcomes; regions

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25824553      PMCID: PMC4475666          DOI: 10.1016/j.healun.2015.01.007

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


  26 in total

1.  Use of an intrapericardial, continuous-flow, centrifugal pump in patients awaiting heart transplantation.

Authors:  Keith D Aaronson; Mark S Slaughter; Leslie W Miller; Edwin C McGee; William G Cotts; Michael A Acker; Mariell L Jessup; Igor D Gregoric; Pranav Loyalka; O H Frazier; Valluvan Jeevanandam; Allen S Anderson; Robert L Kormos; Jeffrey J Teuteberg; Wayne C Levy; David C Naftel; Richard M Bittman; Francis D Pagani; David R Hathaway; Steven W Boyce
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2012-05-22       Impact factor: 29.690

2.  Impact of center volume on outcomes of left ventricular assist device implantation as destination therapy: analysis of the Thoratec HeartMate Registry, 1998 to 2005.

Authors:  Katherine Lietz; James W Long; Abdallah G Kfoury; Mark S Slaughter; Marc A Silver; Carmelo A Milano; Joseph G Rogers; Leslie W Miller; Mario Deng; Yoshifumi Naka; Donna Mancini
Journal:  Circ Heart Fail       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 8.790

3.  Rise of the machines--left ventricular assist devices as permanent therapy for advanced heart failure.

Authors:  James C Fang
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2009-11-17       Impact factor: 91.245

4.  Recommendations for the use of mechanical circulatory support: device strategies and patient selection: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association.

Authors:  Jennifer L Peura; Monica Colvin-Adams; Gary S Francis; Kathleen L Grady; Timothy M Hoffman; Mariell Jessup; Ranjit John; Michael S Kiernan; Judith E Mitchell; John B O'Connell; Francis D Pagani; Michael Petty; Pasala Ravichandran; Joseph G Rogers; Marc J Semigran; J Matthew Toole
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2012-10-29       Impact factor: 29.690

5.  Clinical outcomes for continuous-flow left ventricular assist device patients stratified by pre-operative INTERMACS classification.

Authors:  Andrew J Boyle; Deborah D Ascheim; Mark J Russo; Robert L Kormos; Ranjit John; Yoshifumi Naka; Annetine C Gelijns; Kimberly N Hong; Jeffrey J Teuteberg
Journal:  J Heart Lung Transplant       Date:  2010-12-18       Impact factor: 10.247

6.  Extended mechanical circulatory support with a continuous-flow rotary left ventricular assist device.

Authors:  Francis D Pagani; Leslie W Miller; Stuart D Russell; Keith D Aaronson; Ranjit John; Andrew J Boyle; John V Conte; Roberta C Bogaev; Thomas E MacGillivray; Yoshifumi Naka; Donna Mancini; H Todd Massey; Leway Chen; Charles T Klodell; Juan M Aranda; Nader Moazami; Gregory A Ewald; David J Farrar; O Howard Frazier
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2009-07-21       Impact factor: 24.094

7.  Advanced heart failure treated with continuous-flow left ventricular assist device.

Authors:  Mark S Slaughter; Joseph G Rogers; Carmelo A Milano; Stuart D Russell; John V Conte; David Feldman; Benjamin Sun; Antone J Tatooles; Reynolds M Delgado; James W Long; Thomas C Wozniak; Waqas Ghumman; David J Farrar; O Howard Frazier
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2009-11-17       Impact factor: 91.245

8.  Usefulness of the INTERMACS scale to predict outcomes after mechanical assist device implantation.

Authors:  Ana C Alba; Vivek Rao; Joan Ivanov; Heather J Ross; Diego H Delgado
Journal:  J Heart Lung Transplant       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 10.247

9.  Model for end-stage liver disease score predicts left ventricular assist device operative transfusion requirements, morbidity, and mortality.

Authors:  Jennifer C Matthews; Francis D Pagani; Jonathan W Haft; Todd M Koelling; David C Naftel; Keith D Aaronson
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2010-01-04       Impact factor: 29.690

Review 10.  Mechanical circulatory support: registering a therapy in evolution.

Authors:  James K Kirklin; David C Naftel
Journal:  Circ Heart Fail       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 8.790

View more
  4 in total

1.  Recent Publications by Ochsner Authors.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ochsner J       Date:  2015

2.  Center Variation in Medicare Spending for Durable Left Ventricular Assist Device Implant Hospitalizations.

Authors:  Michael P Thompson; Francis D Pagani; Qixing Liang; Lynze R Franko; Min Zhang; Jeffrey S McCullough; Raymond J Strobel; Keith D Aaronson; Robert L Kormos; Donald S Likosky
Journal:  JAMA Cardiol       Date:  2019-02-01       Impact factor: 14.676

3.  Association of Transplant Center With Survival Benefit Among Adults Undergoing Heart Transplant in the United States.

Authors:  William F Parker; Allen S Anderson; Robert D Gibbons; Edward R Garrity; Lainie F Ross; Elbert S Huang; Matthew M Churpek
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2019-11-12       Impact factor: 56.272

4.  Retrospective Evaluation of Bayesian Risk Models of LVAD Mortality at a Single Implant Center.

Authors:  Lisa C Lohmueller; Manreet K Kanwar; Stephen Bailey; Srinivas Murali; James F Antaki
Journal:  Front Med (Lausanne)       Date:  2018-10-02
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.