Quan M Bui1, Oscar O Braun2, Michela Brambatti3, Yan K Gernhofer4, Holly Hernandez3, Victor Pretorius4, Eric Adler3. 1. Department of Medicine, Division of Cardiology, University of California San Diego, San Diego, California. Electronic address: q3bui@ucsd.edu. 2. Department of Cardiology, Clinical Sciences, Lund University and Skane University Hospital, Lund, Sweden. 3. Department of Medicine, Division of Cardiology, University of California San Diego, San Diego, California. 4. Department of Surgery, Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, University of California San Diego, San Diego, California.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Stanford integrated psychosocial assessment for transplantation (SIPAT) is a validated psychosocial evaluation tool in the transplant population. OBJECTIVE: We evaluated SIPAT in predicting post-left ventricular assist device (LVAD) outcomes, including cumulative re-admissions, driveline infections, pump malfunction, pump thrombosis, gastrointestinal bleeding, major bleeding, stroke and right ventricular failure. METHODS: This retrospective study included 50 LVAD patients at an academic institution in the United States who had a pre-implant SIPAT score during the years 2015-2017. Patients were split into two groups based on SIPAT score, separating a "excellent"/"good" from a "minimally acceptable"/"poor" candidate. Poisson regression, using SIPAT as both a categorical and continuous variable, was used to compare the incidence rates of the primary outcome of cumulative re-admissions and secondary outcomes of LVAD complications. RESULTS: The patient cohort was predominantly male 93.5% vs 89.4% (p = 0.629) with a median age of 67.0 vs 58.0 years (p = 0.037), planned destination therapy 48.4% vs 68.4% (p = 0.242) and median LVAD follow-up time of 241 vs 379 days (p = 0.10) in the low- and high- SIPAT groups, respectively. SIPAT was not a significant predictor for cumulative re-admissions, but there was an association between higher SIPAT scores and major bleeding. CONCLUSION: In this single-center retrospective study, SIPAT did not predict cumulative re-admissions. Further study is required to validate SIPAT before clinical implementation.
BACKGROUND: The Stanford integrated psychosocial assessment for transplantation (SIPAT) is a validated psychosocial evaluation tool in the transplant population. OBJECTIVE: We evaluated SIPAT in predicting post-left ventricular assist device (LVAD) outcomes, including cumulative re-admissions, driveline infections, pump malfunction, pump thrombosis, gastrointestinal bleeding, major bleeding, stroke and right ventricular failure. METHODS: This retrospective study included 50 LVAD patients at an academic institution in the United States who had a pre-implant SIPAT score during the years 2015-2017. Patients were split into two groups based on SIPAT score, separating a "excellent"/"good" from a "minimally acceptable"/"poor" candidate. Poisson regression, using SIPAT as both a categorical and continuous variable, was used to compare the incidence rates of the primary outcome of cumulative re-admissions and secondary outcomes of LVAD complications. RESULTS: The patient cohort was predominantly male 93.5% vs 89.4% (p = 0.629) with a median age of 67.0 vs 58.0 years (p = 0.037), planned destination therapy 48.4% vs 68.4% (p = 0.242) and median LVAD follow-up time of 241 vs 379 days (p = 0.10) in the low- and high- SIPAT groups, respectively. SIPAT was not a significant predictor for cumulative re-admissions, but there was an association between higher SIPAT scores and major bleeding. CONCLUSION: In this single-center retrospective study, SIPAT did not predict cumulative re-admissions. Further study is required to validate SIPAT before clinical implementation.
Authors: Rebecca S Steinberg; Aditi Nayak; Celena O'Connell; Sharon Burford; Ann Pekarek; Neile Chesnut; Robert T Cole; Divya Gupta; S Raja Laskar; Kunal Bhatt; Michael Burke; Tamer Attia; Andrew Smith; J David Vega; Alanna A Morris Journal: Clin Transplant Date: 2020-03-16 Impact factor: 2.863
Authors: Ersilia M DeFilippis; Khadijah Breathett; Elena M Donald; Shunichi Nakagawa; Koji Takeda; Hiroo Takayama; Lauren K Truby; Gabriel Sayer; Paolo C Colombo; Melana Yuzefpolskaya; Nir Uriel; Maryjane A Farr; Veli K Topkara Journal: Circ Heart Fail Date: 2020-09-08 Impact factor: 8.790
Authors: Cecilia Berardi; Claudio A Bravo; Song Li; Maziar Khorsandi; Jeffrey E Keenan; Jonathan Auld; Sunny Rockom; Jennifer A Beckman; Claudius Mahr Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2022-04-05 Impact factor: 4.241
Authors: Mary Amanda Dew; Andrea F DiMartini; Fabienne Dobbels; Kathleen L Grady; Sheila G Jowsey-Gregoire; Annemarie Kaan; Kay Kendall; Quincy-Robyn Young Journal: Curr Heart Fail Rep Date: 2019-12