Amanda Cai1,2, Howard J Eisen3,4. 1. Department of Medicine, Hahnemann University Hospital, Philadelphia, PA, USA. 2. Drexel University College of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA. 3. Drexel University College of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA. heisen@drexelmed.edu. 4. Division of Cardiology, Hahnemann University Hospital, Philadelphia, PA, USA. heisen@drexelmed.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: As the heart failure population continues to age, the need for definitive therapies such as ventricular assist devices (VADs) to extend life and alleviate suffering from end-stage disease directly increases. The goal of this article is to examine the ethical principles of autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, and justice within the context of long-term VAD patients. RECENT FINDINGS: Survival rates in VAD-implanted patients have improved in parallel with modernization of device design and surgical technique, reaching that of cardiac transplantation at 1 year post-procedure. Even the sickest patients, those once deemed transplant-ineligible, have been proven to benefit from device implantation and in some cases to a point of becoming eligible for cardiac transplantation. Nevertheless, VAD implantation remains a high-risk procedure with in-hospital mortality rates reaching up to 27% post-procedure and requires intensive upkeep even after successful implantation. Furthermore, end-of-life decisions are complicated by consideration of device deactivation in patients who may not die immediately from an otherwise lethal pathophysiology. Ethical considerations in selection of patients, goals of implantation, and length of therapy become important to preserve the efficacy of treatment and maximize resource utilization. Advanced directives, shared decision-making, and multi-disciplinary approach to treatment have been shown to improve outcomes with respect to both survival and quality of life.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: As the heart failure population continues to age, the need for definitive therapies such as ventricular assist devices (VADs) to extend life and alleviate suffering from end-stage disease directly increases. The goal of this article is to examine the ethical principles of autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, and justice within the context of long-term VAD patients. RECENT FINDINGS: Survival rates in VAD-implanted patients have improved in parallel with modernization of device design and surgical technique, reaching that of cardiac transplantation at 1 year post-procedure. Even the sickest patients, those once deemed transplant-ineligible, have been proven to benefit from device implantation and in some cases to a point of becoming eligible for cardiac transplantation. Nevertheless, VAD implantation remains a high-risk procedure with in-hospital mortality rates reaching up to 27% post-procedure and requires intensive upkeep even after successful implantation. Furthermore, end-of-life decisions are complicated by consideration of device deactivation in patients who may not die immediately from an otherwise lethal pathophysiology. Ethical considerations in selection of patients, goals of implantation, and length of therapy become important to preserve the efficacy of treatment and maximize resource utilization. Advanced directives, shared decision-making, and multi-disciplinary approach to treatment have been shown to improve outcomes with respect to both survival and quality of life.
Authors: Mariell Jessup; William T Abraham; Donald E Casey; Arthur M Feldman; Gary S Francis; Theodore G Ganiats; Marvin A Konstam; Donna M Mancini; Peter S Rahko; Marc A Silver; Lynne Warner Stevenson; Clyde W Yancy Journal: Circulation Date: 2009-03-26 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Josef Stehlik; Leah B Edwards; Anna Y Kucheryavaya; Christian Benden; Jason D Christie; Anne I Dipchand; Fabienne Dobbels; Richard Kirk; Axel O Rahmel; Marshall I Hertz Journal: J Heart Lung Transplant Date: 2012-10 Impact factor: 10.247
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
Authors: Jerry D Estep; Randall C Starling; Douglas A Horstmanshof; Carmelo A Milano; Craig H Selzman; Keyur B Shah; Matthias Loebe; Nader Moazami; James W Long; Josef Stehlik; Vigneshwar Kasirajan; Donald C Haas; John B O'Connell; Andrew J Boyle; David J Farrar; Joseph G Rogers Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2015-10-20 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: S A Hunt; D W Baker; M H Chin; M P Cinquegrani; A M Feldman; G S Francis; T G Ganiats; S Goldstein; G Gregoratos; M L Jessup; R J Noble; M Packer; M A Silver; L W Stevenson; R J Gibbons; E M Antman; J S Alpert; D P Faxon; V Fuster; A K Jacobs; L F Hiratzka; R O Russell; S C Smith Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2001-12 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: James K Kirklin; David C Naftel; Francis D Pagani; Robert L Kormos; Susan Myers; Michael A Acker; Joseph Rogers; Mark S Slaughter; Lynne W Stevenson Journal: J Heart Lung Transplant Date: 2015-12 Impact factor: 10.247
Authors: Wayne C Levy; Dariush Mozaffarian; David T Linker; Santosh C Sutradhar; Stefan D Anker; Anne B Cropp; Inder Anand; Aldo Maggioni; Paul Burton; Mark D Sullivan; Bertram Pitt; Philip A Poole-Wilson; Douglas L Mann; Milton Packer Journal: Circulation Date: 2006-03-13 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Joseph G Rogers; Javed Butler; Steven L Lansman; Alan Gass; Peer M Portner; Michael K Pasque; Richard N Pierson Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2007-08-06 Impact factor: 24.094