Literature DB >> 27793517

A multi-institutional outcome analysis of patients undergoing left ventricular assist device implantation stratified by sex and race.

Justin van Meeteren1, Simon Maltais1, Shannon M Dunlay1, Nicholas A Haglund2, Mary Beth Davis2, Jennifer Cowger3, Palak Shah4, Keith D Aaronson5, Francis D Pagani5, John M Stulak6.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Earlier studies have demonstrated disparities in patients undergoing left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation when stratified according to sex and race. Because very few data exist from large investigations, we reviewed data from the registry of the Mechanical Circulatory Support Research Network.
METHODS: Between May 2004 and September 2014, 734 patients underwent primary LVAD implantation at our institutions. Median age at implant was 57 (range 18 to 82) years and there were 577 males (80%). Race included Caucasian (C) in 586 patients (82%), African-American (AA) in 112 (16%), and other (O) in 21 (3%). Between sexes, significant pre-operative differences most commonly included median age at implant (males 60 years, females 57 years), ischemic etiology (53% vs 35%) and mean INTERMACS profile (2.9 vs 2.5). Between races, significant pre-operative differences most commonly included median age at implant (C = 61 vs AA = 51 vs O = 51), New York Heart Association functional class (85% vs 100% vs 92%) and ischemic etiology (55% vs 24% vs 40%).
RESULTS: There were no significant differences in survival at 1, 3 or 5 years by sex or race. Similarly, there were no differences in time-related freedom from stroke, drive-line infection, gastrointestinal bleeding or pump thrombus by sex or race. After controlling for differences, neither sex nor race was associated with survival (p = 0.09 and p = 0.18, respectively), stroke (p = 0.28 and p = 0.21), drive-line infection (p = 0.9 and p = 0.92), gastrointestinal bleed (p = 0.48 and p = 0.45) or pump thrombus (p = 0.99 and p = 0.8).
CONCLUSIONS: In this large, multi-institutional analysis, although some pre-operative clinical characteristics varied, they did not translate into any significant differences in late survival or complications while on LVAD support.
Copyright © 2016 International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  disparities; mechanical circulatory assistance; race; ventricular assist device

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27793517     DOI: 10.1016/j.healun.2016.08.027

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


  11 in total

Review 1.  Mechanical Circulatory Support: a Comprehensive Review With a Focus on Women.

Authors:  Manal Alasnag; Alexander G Truesdell; Holli Williams; Sara C Martinez; Syeda Kashfi Qadri; John P Skendelas; William A Jakobleff; Mirvat Alasnag
Journal:  Curr Atheroscler Rep       Date:  2020-04-23       Impact factor: 5.113

2.  Long-term survival on LVAD support: Device complications and end-organ dysfunction limit long-term success.

Authors:  Imad M Hariri; Todd Dardas; Manreet Kanwar; Rebecca Cogswell; Igor Gosev; Ezequiel Molina; Susan L Myers; James K Kirklin; Palak Shah; Francis D Pagani; Jennifer A Cowger
Journal:  J Heart Lung Transplant       Date:  2021-07-24       Impact factor: 10.247

Review 3.  Prevention and Treatment of Thrombotic and Hemorrhagic Complications in Patients Supported by Continuous-Flow Left Ventricular Assist Devices.

Authors:  Renzo Y Loyaga-Rendon; Milena Jani; David Fermin; Jennifer K McDermott; Diane Vancamp; Sangjin Lee
Journal:  Curr Heart Fail Rep       Date:  2017-12

4.  Role of paediatric assist device in bridge to transplant.

Authors:  Roland Hetzer; Mariano Francisco Del Maria Javier; Eva Maria Delmo Walter
Journal:  Ann Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2018-01

5.  Sex differences in outcomes following less-invasive left ventricular assist device implantation.

Authors:  Silvia Mariani; Tong Li; Karl Bounader; Dietmar Boethig; Alexandra Schöde; Jasmin S Hanke; Jana Michaelis; L Christian Napp; Dominik Berliner; Guenes Dogan; Roberto Lorusso; Axel Haverich; Jan D Schmitto
Journal:  Ann Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2021-03

6.  Social Determinants of Health and Rates of Implantation for Patients Considering Destination Therapy Left Ventricular Assist Device.

Authors:  Kelsey Flint; Erin L Chaussee; Kamal Henderson; Khadijah Breathett; Prateeti Khazanie; Jocelyn S Thompson; Colleen K Mcilvennan; Shane J Larue; Daniel D Matlock; Larry A Allen
Journal:  J Card Fail       Date:  2020-12-18       Impact factor: 5.712

7.  Gender disparities with the use of percutaneous left ventricular assist device in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention complicated by cardiogenic shock: From pVAD Working Group.

Authors:  Rajkumar Doshi; Krunalkumar Patel; Dean Decter; Rajiv Jauhar; Perwaiz Meraj
Journal:  Indian Heart J       Date:  2018-04-30

Review 8.  Are the current evaluation tools for advanced therapies biased?

Authors:  Raymond C Givens
Journal:  Curr Opin Cardiol       Date:  2021-05-01       Impact factor: 2.108

9.  Prevalence of Cerebral Microbleeds in Patients With Continuous-Flow Left Ventricular Assist Devices.

Authors:  Daisuke Yoshioka; Shuhei Okazaki; Koichi Toda; Sho Murase; Shunsuke Saito; Keitaro Domae; Shigeru Miyagawa; Yasushi Yoshikawa; Takashi Daimon; Manabu Sakaguchi; Yoshiki Sawa
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2017-09-11       Impact factor: 5.501

10.  Effectiveness of an Intervention Supporting Shared Decision Making for Destination Therapy Left Ventricular Assist Device: The DECIDE-LVAD Randomized Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Larry A Allen; Colleen K McIlvennan; Jocelyn S Thompson; Shannon M Dunlay; Shane J LaRue; Eldrin F Lewis; Chetan B Patel; Laura Blue; Diane L Fairclough; Erin C Leister; Russell E Glasgow; Joseph C Cleveland; Clifford Phillips; Vicie Baldridge; Mary Norine Walsh; Daniel D Matlock
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2018-04-01       Impact factor: 21.873

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.