Keyur B Shah1, Randall C Starling2, Joseph G Rogers3, Douglas A Horstmanshof4, James W Long4, Vigneshwar Kasirajan5, Josef Stehlik6, Joyce Chuang7, David J Farrar7, Jerry D Estep8. 1. Department of Surgery, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia, USA. Electronic address: kbs811@gmail.com. 2. Division of Cardiology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA. 3. Division of Cardiology, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, USA. 4. Division of Cardiology, INTEGRIS Baptist Medical Center, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, USA. 5. Department of Surgery, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia, USA. 6. Division of Cardiology, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA. 7. Abbott, Pleasanton, California, USA. 8. Division of Cardiology, Houston Methodist Hospital, Houston, Texas, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The ROADMAP study showed survival with improved functional status was better with left ventricular assist device (LVAD) therapy compared with optimal medical management (OMM) in ambulatory, non-inotrope-dependent (INTERMACS [IM] Profile 4 to 7) patients. To study more balanced cohorts and better define which patients may benefit from implantation of an LVAD, we re-evaluated the patients enrolled in ROADMAP when stratified by INTERMACS profile (Profile 4 and Profiles 5 to 7). METHODS: The primary end-point (survival on original therapy with improvement in 6-minute walk distance ≥75 meters at 1 year), actuarial survival, adverse events (AEs) and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) were evaluated. RESULTS: For INTERMACS Profile 4 (IM4), more LVAD patients met the primary end-point compared with OMM patients (40% vs 15%; odds ratio = 3.9 [1.2 to 12.7], p = 0.024), but there was no statistically significant difference for INTERMACS Profiles IM 5 to 7 (IM5-7). Event-free survival on original therapy at 2 years was greater for LVAD than for OMM patients in both IM4 (67% vs 28%; p < 0.001) and IM5-7 (76% vs 49%; p = 0.025) profile groups. Composite end-points of survival on original therapy with improved HRQoL or depression were better with LVAD than OMM in IM4, but not IM5-7. AEs trended higher in LVAD compared with OMM patients in both profile groups. Rehospitalization rates for LVAD vs OMM were similar between treatment arms in IM4 (82% vs 86%; p = 0.780), but were higher for LVAD in IM5-7 (93% vs 71%; p = 0.016). CONCLUSIONS: LVAD patients in IM4, but not IM5-7, are more likely to meet the primary end-point and have improvements in HRQoL and depression compared with OMM, even with AEs generally being more frequent. LVAD therapy with current technology may be beneficial in select IM4 patients, but can be deferred for most IM5-7 patients, who should be followed closely due to the high frequency of treatment failures.
BACKGROUND: The ROADMAP study showed survival with improved functional status was better with left ventricular assist device (LVAD) therapy compared with optimal medical management (OMM) in ambulatory, non-inotrope-dependent (INTERMACS [IM] Profile 4 to 7) patients. To study more balanced cohorts and better define which patients may benefit from implantation of an LVAD, we re-evaluated the patients enrolled in ROADMAP when stratified by INTERMACS profile (Profile 4 and Profiles 5 to 7). METHODS: The primary end-point (survival on original therapy with improvement in 6-minute walk distance ≥75 meters at 1 year), actuarial survival, adverse events (AEs) and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) were evaluated. RESULTS: For INTERMACS Profile 4 (IM4), more LVADpatients met the primary end-point compared with OMMpatients (40% vs 15%; odds ratio = 3.9 [1.2 to 12.7], p = 0.024), but there was no statistically significant difference for INTERMACS Profiles IM 5 to 7 (IM5-7). Event-free survival on original therapy at 2 years was greater for LVAD than for OMMpatients in both IM4 (67% vs 28%; p < 0.001) and IM5-7 (76% vs 49%; p = 0.025) profile groups. Composite end-points of survival on original therapy with improved HRQoL or depression were better with LVAD than OMM in IM4, but not IM5-7. AEs trended higher in LVAD compared with OMMpatients in both profile groups. Rehospitalization rates for LVAD vs OMM were similar between treatment arms in IM4 (82% vs 86%; p = 0.780), but were higher for LVAD in IM5-7 (93% vs 71%; p = 0.016). CONCLUSIONS:LVADpatients in IM4, but not IM5-7, are more likely to meet the primary end-point and have improvements in HRQoL and depression compared with OMM, even with AEs generally being more frequent. LVAD therapy with current technology may be beneficial in select IM4 patients, but can be deferred for most IM5-7 patients, who should be followed closely due to the high frequency of treatment failures.
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: P Christian Schulze; Markus J Barten; Udo Boeken; Gloria Färber; Christian M Hagl; Christian Jung; David Leistner; Evgenij Potapov; Johann Bauersachs; Philip Raake; Nils Reiss; Diyar Saeed; David Schibilsky; Stefan Störk; Christian Veltmann; Andreas J Rieth; Jan Gummert Journal: Med Klin Intensivmed Notfmed Date: 2022-07-11 Impact factor: 1.552
Authors: Sakir Akin; Osama Soliman; Theo M M H de By; Rahatullah Muslem; Jan G P Tijssen; Felix Schoenrath; Bart Meyns; Jan F Gummert; Paul Mohacsi; Kadir Caliskan Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2020-02-03 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: R Hamdan; S Fakih; M Mohammad; F Charif; H Abdallah; S Safa; F Al Ali; M Issa; B Damen; A El Zein; M Younes; A Rabah; M Saab Journal: J Cardiothorac Surg Date: 2020-07-28 Impact factor: 1.637
Authors: Jesse F Veenis; Olivier C Manintveld; Alina A Constantinescu; Kadir Caliskan; Ozcan Birim; Jos A Bekkers; Nicolas M van Mieghem; Corstiaan A den Uil; Eric Boersma; Mattie J Lenzen; Felix Zijlstra; William T Abraham; Philip B Adamson; Jasper J Brugts Journal: ESC Heart Fail Date: 2019-01-07