Jennifer A Cowger1, John M Stulak2, Palak Shah3, Todd F Dardas4, Francis D Pagani5, Shannon M Dunlay6, Simon Maltais2, Keith D Aaronson7, Ramesh Singh8, Nahush A Mokadam9, James K Kirklin10, Christopher T Salerno11. 1. Cardiovascular Medicine, Henry Ford Medical Center, Detroit, Michigan. Electronic address: jennifercowger@gmail.com. 2. Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota. 3. Cardiovascular Medicine, Inova Heart and Vascular Institute, Fairfax, Virginia. 4. Cardiovascular Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington. 5. Cardiac Surgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan. 6. Cardiovascular Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota. 7. Cardiovascular Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan. 8. Cardiac Surgery, Inova Heart and Vascular Institute, Falls Church, Virginia. 9. Cardiovascular Surgery, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington. 10. Cardiothoracic Surgery, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama. 11. Cardiac Surgery, St. Vincent Heart Center, Indianapolis, Indiana.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This study examined patient outcomes after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation across a range of center surgical volumes. BACKGROUND: In order for a center to qualify for reimbursement, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) requires it to implant ≥10 LVADs or total artificial hearts over a 3-year period. The impact of center LVAD surgical volumes on patient outcomes has not been thoroughly scrutinized. METHODS: Center volumes were provided for 7,416 patients undergoing LVAD implantation who were enrolled in INTERMACS (Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support). Center LVAD volume was categorized as either very low (≤10 implants/year, n = 617), low (11 to 30 implants/year, n = 2,561), medium (31 to 50 implants/year, n = 2,458), or high (>50 implants/year, n = 1,750). The main outcome of interest was patient survival based on center volume derived from Kaplan-Meier and multivariate Cox regression. RESULTS: Overall survival was associated with center volume (p = 0.003), as follows: 71 ± 1.8% (very low volume), 81 ± 0.8% (low volume), 83 ± 0.8% (medium volume), and 79 ± 1.0% (high volume) at 1 year. Compared with medium volume centers, the 90-day mortality was higher in very low volume (odds ratio [OR]: 1.35; p = 0.04) and high volume (OR: 1.28; p = 0.018) VAD centers. The adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for mortality were 1.32 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.11 to 1.56), 1.07 (95% CI: 0.95 to 1.21), and 1.17 (95% CI: 1.03 to 1.30) for very low, low, and high volume centers, respectively. Center volume did not predict mortality (p = 0.25; n = 3,688) in INTERMACS profile 1 patients (patients who had sustained cardiogenic shock) and profile 2 patients (patients with progressive hemodynamic decline despite inotropes). CONCLUSIONS: Center volume correlates with post-VAD survival, with worse survival noted at very-low volume centers. These findings suggest that current U.S. VAD center standards warrant reconsideration.
OBJECTIVES: This study examined patient outcomes after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation across a range of center surgical volumes. BACKGROUND: In order for a center to qualify for reimbursement, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) requires it to implant ≥10 LVADs or total artificial hearts over a 3-year period. The impact of center LVAD surgical volumes on patient outcomes has not been thoroughly scrutinized. METHODS: Center volumes were provided for 7,416 patients undergoing LVAD implantation who were enrolled in INTERMACS (Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support). Center LVAD volume was categorized as either very low (≤10 implants/year, n = 617), low (11 to 30 implants/year, n = 2,561), medium (31 to 50 implants/year, n = 2,458), or high (>50 implants/year, n = 1,750). The main outcome of interest was patient survival based on center volume derived from Kaplan-Meier and multivariate Cox regression. RESULTS: Overall survival was associated with center volume (p = 0.003), as follows: 71 ± 1.8% (very low volume), 81 ± 0.8% (low volume), 83 ± 0.8% (medium volume), and 79 ± 1.0% (high volume) at 1 year. Compared with medium volume centers, the 90-day mortality was higher in very low volume (odds ratio [OR]: 1.35; p = 0.04) and high volume (OR: 1.28; p = 0.018) VAD centers. The adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for mortality were 1.32 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.11 to 1.56), 1.07 (95% CI: 0.95 to 1.21), and 1.17 (95% CI: 1.03 to 1.30) for very low, low, and high volume centers, respectively. Center volume did not predict mortality (p = 0.25; n = 3,688) in INTERMACS profile 1 patients (patients who had sustained cardiogenic shock) and profile 2 patients (patients with progressive hemodynamic decline despite inotropes). CONCLUSIONS: Center volume correlates with post-VAD survival, with worse survival noted at very-low volume centers. These findings suggest that current U.S. VAD center standards warrant reconsideration.
Authors: Manreet K Kanwar; Lisa C Lohmueller; Robert L Kormos; Jeffrey J Teuteberg; Joseph G Rogers; JoAnn Lindenfeld; Stephen H Bailey; Colleen K McIlvennan; Raymond Benza; Srinivas Murali; James Antaki Journal: JACC Heart Fail Date: 2018-08-08 Impact factor: 12.035
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
Authors: Michael J Pienta; Xiaoting Wu; Thomas M Cascino; Alexander A Brescia; Ashraf Abou El Ela; Min Zhang; Jeffrey S McCullough; Supriya Shore; Keith D Aaronson; Michael P Thompson; Francis D Pagani; Donald S Likosky Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2022-02-15 Impact factor: 5.102
Authors: Michael J Pienta; Thomas M Cascino; Donald S Likosky; Amir A Ghaferi; Keith D Aaronson; Francis D Pagani; Michael P Thompson Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2021-11-09 Impact factor: 6.439
Authors: Evgenij V Potapov; Christiaan Antonides; Maria G Crespo-Leiro; Alain Combes; Gloria Färber; Margaret M Hannan; Marian Kukucka; Nicolaas de Jonge; Antonio Loforte; Lars H Lund; Paul Mohacsi; Michiel Morshuis; Ivan Netuka; Mustafa Özbaran; Federico Pappalardo; Anna Mara Scandroglio; Martin Schweiger; Steven Tsui; Daniel Zimpfer; Finn Gustafsson Journal: Eur J Cardiothorac Surg Date: 2019-08-01 Impact factor: 4.191
Authors: Joel C Boudreaux; Marian Urban; Anthony W Castleberry; John Y Um; Michael J Moulton; Aleem Siddique Journal: J Card Surg Date: 2022-07-21 Impact factor: 1.778