Josef Stehlik1, Jerry D Estep2, Craig H Selzman2, Joseph G Rogers2, John A Spertus2, Keyur B Shah2, Joyce Chuang2, David J Farrar2, Randall C Starling2. 1. From the University of Utah, Salt Lake City (J.S., C.H.S.); Houston Methodist Hospital, TX (J.D.E.); Duke University, Durham, NC (J.G.R.); University of Missouri-Kansas City and Saint Luke's Mid America Heart Institute, Kansas City, MO (J.A.S.); Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond (K.B.S.); Abbott, Pleasanton, CA (J.C., D.J.F.); and Cleveland Clinic, OH (R.C.S.). josef.stehlik@hsc.utah.edu. 2. From the University of Utah, Salt Lake City (J.S., C.H.S.); Houston Methodist Hospital, TX (J.D.E.); Duke University, Durham, NC (J.G.R.); University of Missouri-Kansas City and Saint Luke's Mid America Heart Institute, Kansas City, MO (J.A.S.); Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond (K.B.S.); Abbott, Pleasanton, CA (J.C., D.J.F.); and Cleveland Clinic, OH (R.C.S.).
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The prospective observational ROADMAP study (Risk Assessment and Comparative Effectiveness of Left Ventricular Assist Device and Medical Management) demonstrated that ambulatory advanced heart failure patients selected for left ventricular assist device (LVAD) were more likely to be alive at 1 year on original therapy with ≥75-m improvement in 6-minute walk distance compared with patients assigned to optimal medical management. Whether baseline health-related quality of life (hrQoL) resulted in a heterogeneity of this treatment benefit is unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patient-reported hrQoL was assessed with EuroQol questionnaire and visual analogue scale (VAS). We aimed to identify predictors of event-free survival and survival with acceptable hrQoL (VAS≥60). LVAD patients had significant improvement in 3 of 5 EuroQol dimensions (P<0.05), but no significant changes were observed with optimal medical management. Among patients with baseline VAS<55, survival on original treatment was lower for optimal medical management patients compared with those assigned to LVAD (58±7% versus 82±5%; P=0.004). No such difference was seen if baseline VAS was ≥55 (70±7% versus 75±9%; P=0.79). Survival on original therapy with acceptable quality of life was also more likely with LVAD versus optimal medical management if baseline VAS was <55, whereas outcomes in patients with higher baseline VAS scores were similar regardless of treatment assignment (P=0.046 for treatment arm and baseline VAS interaction). CONCLUSIONS:LVAD therapy resulted in improvement of patient health status in heart failure patients with low self-reported hrQoL, but not in patients with acceptable quality of life at the time of LVAD implantation. Patient-reported hrQoL should be integrated into decision making concerning the use and timing of LVAD therapy in heart failure patients who are symptom limited but remain ambulatory. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.ClinicalTrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01452802.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: The prospective observational ROADMAP study (Risk Assessment and Comparative Effectiveness of Left Ventricular Assist Device and Medical Management) demonstrated that ambulatory advanced heart failurepatients selected for left ventricular assist device (LVAD) were more likely to be alive at 1 year on original therapy with ≥75-m improvement in 6-minute walk distance compared with patients assigned to optimal medical management. Whether baseline health-related quality of life (hrQoL) resulted in a heterogeneity of this treatment benefit is unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS:Patient-reported hrQoL was assessed with EuroQol questionnaire and visual analogue scale (VAS). We aimed to identify predictors of event-free survival and survival with acceptable hrQoL (VAS≥60). LVADpatients had significant improvement in 3 of 5 EuroQol dimensions (P<0.05), but no significant changes were observed with optimal medical management. Among patients with baseline VAS<55, survival on original treatment was lower for optimal medical management patients compared with those assigned to LVAD (58±7% versus 82±5%; P=0.004). No such difference was seen if baseline VAS was ≥55 (70±7% versus 75±9%; P=0.79). Survival on original therapy with acceptable quality of life was also more likely with LVAD versus optimal medical management if baseline VAS was <55, whereas outcomes in patients with higher baseline VAS scores were similar regardless of treatment assignment (P=0.046 for treatment arm and baseline VAS interaction). CONCLUSIONS:LVAD therapy resulted in improvement of patient health status in heart failurepatients with low self-reported hrQoL, but not in patients with acceptable quality of life at the time of LVAD implantation. Patient-reported hrQoL should be integrated into decision making concerning the use and timing of LVAD therapy in heart failurepatients who are symptom limited but remain ambulatory. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.ClinicalTrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01452802.
Authors: Edmond M Cronin; Frank M Bogun; Philippe Maury; Petr Peichl; Minglong Chen; Narayanan Namboodiri; Luis Aguinaga; Luiz Roberto Leite; Sana M Al-Khatib; Elad Anter; Antonio Berruezo; David J Callans; Mina K Chung; Phillip Cuculich; Andre d'Avila; Barbara J Deal; Paolo Della Bella; Thomas Deneke; Timm-Michael Dickfeld; Claudio Hadid; Haris M Haqqani; G Neal Kay; Rakesh Latchamsetty; Francis Marchlinski; John M Miller; Akihiko Nogami; Akash R Patel; Rajeev Kumar Pathak; Luis C Saenz Morales; Pasquale Santangeli; John L Sapp; Andrea Sarkozy; Kyoko Soejima; William G Stevenson; Usha B Tedrow; Wendy S Tzou; Niraj Varma; Katja Zeppenfeld Journal: J Interv Card Electrophysiol Date: 2020-10 Impact factor: 1.900
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: Edmond M Cronin; Frank M Bogun; Philippe Maury; Petr Peichl; Minglong Chen; Narayanan Namboodiri; Luis Aguinaga; Luiz Roberto Leite; Sana M Al-Khatib; Elad Anter; Antonio Berruezo; David J Callans; Mina K Chung; Phillip Cuculich; Andre d'Avila; Barbara J Deal; Paolo Della Bella; Thomas Deneke; Timm-Michael Dickfeld; Claudio Hadid; Haris M Haqqani; G Neal Kay; Rakesh Latchamsetty; Francis Marchlinski; John M Miller; Akihiko Nogami; Akash R Patel; Rajeev Kumar Pathak; Luis C Sáenz Morales; Pasquale Santangeli; John L Sapp; Andrea Sarkozy; Kyoko Soejima; William G Stevenson; Usha B Tedrow; Wendy S Tzou; Niraj Varma; Katja Zeppenfeld Journal: Europace Date: 2019-08-01 Impact factor: 5.214
Authors: Garrick C Stewart; Thomas Cascino; Blair Richards; Shokoufeh Khalatbari; Douglas L Mann; Wendy C Taddei-Peters; J Timothy Baldwin; Neal O Jeffries; Catherine Spino; Lynne W Stevenson; Keith D Aaronson Journal: JACC Heart Fail Date: 2019-05-08 Impact factor: 12.035
Authors: Josef Stehlik; Maria Mountis; Donald Haas; Maryse Palardy; Amrut V Ambardekar; Jerry D Estep; Gregory Ewald; Stuart D Russell; Shawn Robinson; Ulrich Jorde; Wendy C Taddei-Peters; Neal Jeffries; Blair Richards; Shokoufeh Khalatbari; Catherine Spino; J Timothy Baldwin; Douglas Mann; Garrick C Stewart; Keith D Aaronson Journal: J Heart Lung Transplant Date: 2019-11-20 Impact factor: 10.247