OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to provide the pre-specified primary endpoint of the ROADMAP (Risk Assessment and Comparative Effectiveness of Left Ventricular Assist Device and Medical Management in Ambulatory Heart Failure Patients) trial at 2 years. BACKGROUND: The ROADMAP trial was a prospective nonrandomized observational study of 200 patients (97 with a left ventricular assist device [LVAD], 103 on optimal medical management [OMM]) that showed that survival with improved functional status at 1 year was better with LVADs compared with OMM in a patient population of ambulatory New York Heart Association functional class IIIb/IV patients. METHODS: The primary composite endpoint was survival on original therapy with improvement in 6-min walk distance ≥75 m. RESULTS: Patients receiving LVAD versus OMM had lower baseline health-related quality of life, reduced Seattle Heart Failure Model 1-year survival (78% vs. 84%; p = 0.012), and were predominantly INTERMACS (Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support) profile 4 (65% vs. 34%; p < 0.001) versus profiles 5 to 7. More LVAD patients met the primary endpoint at 2 years: 30% LVAD versus 12% OMM (odds ratio: 3.2 [95% confidence interval: 1.3 to 7.7]; p = 0.012). Survival as treated on original therapy at 2 years was greater for LVAD versus OMM (70 ± 5% vs. 41 ± 5%; p < 0.001), but there was no difference in intent-to-treat survival (70 ± 5% vs. 63 ± 5%; p = 0.307). In the OMM arm, 23 of 103 (22%) received delayed LVADs (18 within 12 months; 5 from 12 to 24 months). LVAD adverse events declined after year 1 for bleeding (primarily gastrointestinal) and arrhythmias. CONCLUSIONS: Survival on original therapy with improvement in 6-min walk distance was superior with LVAD compared with OMM at 2 years. Reduction in key adverse events beyond 1 year was observed in the LVAD group. The ROADMAP trial provides risk-benefit information to guide patient- and physician-shared decision making for elective LVAD therapy as a treatment for heart failure. (Risk Assessment and Comparative Effectiveness of Left Ventricular Assist Device and Medical Management in Ambulatory Heart Failure Patients [ROADMAP]; NCT01452802).
OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to provide the pre-specified primary endpoint of the ROADMAP (Risk Assessment and Comparative Effectiveness of Left Ventricular Assist Device and Medical Management in Ambulatory Heart FailurePatients) trial at 2 years. BACKGROUND: The ROADMAP trial was a prospective nonrandomized observational study of 200 patients (97 with a left ventricular assist device [LVAD], 103 on optimal medical management [OMM]) that showed that survival with improved functional status at 1 year was better with LVADs compared with OMM in a patient population of ambulatory New York Heart Association functional class IIIb/IV patients. METHODS: The primary composite endpoint was survival on original therapy with improvement in 6-min walk distance ≥75 m. RESULTS:Patients receiving LVAD versus OMM had lower baseline health-related quality of life, reduced Seattle Heart Failure Model 1-year survival (78% vs. 84%; p = 0.012), and were predominantly INTERMACS (Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support) profile 4 (65% vs. 34%; p < 0.001) versus profiles 5 to 7. More LVADpatients met the primary endpoint at 2 years: 30% LVAD versus 12% OMM (odds ratio: 3.2 [95% confidence interval: 1.3 to 7.7]; p = 0.012). Survival as treated on original therapy at 2 years was greater for LVAD versus OMM (70 ± 5% vs. 41 ± 5%; p < 0.001), but there was no difference in intent-to-treat survival (70 ± 5% vs. 63 ± 5%; p = 0.307). In the OMM arm, 23 of 103 (22%) received delayed LVADs (18 within 12 months; 5 from 12 to 24 months). LVAD adverse events declined after year 1 for bleeding (primarily gastrointestinal) and arrhythmias. CONCLUSIONS: Survival on original therapy with improvement in 6-min walk distance was superior with LVAD compared with OMM at 2 years. Reduction in key adverse events beyond 1 year was observed in the LVAD group. The ROADMAP trial provides risk-benefit information to guide patient- and physician-shared decision making for elective LVAD therapy as a treatment for heart failure. (Risk Assessment and Comparative Effectiveness of Left Ventricular Assist Device and Medical Management in Ambulatory Heart FailurePatients [ROADMAP]; NCT01452802).
Authors: Windy W Alonso; Kenneth M Faulkner; Bunny J Pozehl; Judith E Hupcey; Lisa A Kitko; Christopher S Lee Journal: Res Nurs Health Date: 2020-07-06 Impact factor: 2.228
Authors: Dariusz Dudek; Waldemar Banasiak; Wojciech Braksator; Jacek Dubiel; Tomasz Grodzicki; Piotr Hoffman; Mariusz Kuśmierczyk; Grzegorz Opolski; Piotr Ponikowski; Jacek Różański; Jerzy Sadowski; Wojciech Wojakowski; Marcin Grabowski; Katarzyna Bondaryk; Jacek Walczak; Izabela Pieniążek; Maciej Grys; Anna Lesiak-Bednarek; Piotr Przygodzki Journal: Cardiol J Date: 2019-02-14 Impact factor: 2.737
Authors: Amrut V Ambardekar; Michelle M Kittleson; Maryse Palardy; Maria M Mountis; Rhondalyn C Forde-McLean; Adam D DeVore; Salpy V Pamboukian; Jennifer T Thibodeau; Jeffrey J Teuteberg; Linda Cadaret; Rongbing Xie; Wendy Taddei-Peters; David C Naftel; James K Kirklin; Lynne W Stevenson; Garrick C Stewart Journal: J Heart Lung Transplant Date: 2018-10-01 Impact factor: 10.247
Authors: Megan M Streur; Jonathan P Auld; Ana Carolina Sauer Liberato; Jennifer A Beckman; Claudius Mahr; Elaine A Thompson; Cynthia M Dougherty Journal: J Card Fail Date: 2020-06-05 Impact factor: 5.712
Authors: Jan F Gummert; Axel Haverich; Jan D Schmitto; Evgenij Potapov; René Schramm; Volkmar Falk Journal: Dtsch Arztebl Int Date: 2019-12-13 Impact factor: 5.594