-
Comparative Study
Early Outcomes With Marginal Donor Hearts Compared With Left Ventricular Assist Device Support in Patients With Advanced Heart Failure.
- Erin M Schumer, Mickey S Ising, Jaimin R Trivedi, Mark S Slaughter, and Allen Cheng.
- Department of Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery, University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky.
- Ann. Thorac. Surg. 2015 Aug 1;100(2):522-7.
BackgroundThe shortage of donor hearts has limited cardiac transplantation for end-stage heart failure, leading to the increased use of left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) as bridge-to-transplant (BTT) and marginal donor hearts; however, outcomes have been mixed. This study examines differences in wait list survival of patients with continuous flow LVADs and post-transplantation survival of patients receiving a marginal donor heart.MethodsThe United Network of Organ Sharing database was retrospectively queried from January 2005 to June 2013 to identify adult patients listed for heart transplant. Marginal donor criteria included age greater than 55 years, hepatitis C positive, cocaine use, ejection fraction less than 0.45, or donor to recipient body mass index mismatch of greater than 20%. The primary endpoint was wait list survival of patients with LVADs compared with post-transplant survival of marginal donor heart recipients using Kaplan-Meier analysis.ResultsA total of 2,561 and 4,737 patients received LVAD support or a marginal donor heart, respectively. The 30-day, 1-year, and 2-year survival was 96%, 89%, and 85%, for patients with LVAD support on the waiting list and 97%, 89%, and 85%, respectively, for recipients of marginal donor hearts (p = 0.213). Recipients of marginal hearts had worse survival than non-marginal heart recipients at 3 years (p = 0.011).ConclusionsThere was no significant difference between waiting list survival of patients with LVAD support as BTT and post-transplant survival of recipients with marginal donor hearts. There could be clinical benefits for using LVAD support as BTT to allow time for better allocation of optimal donor hearts as opposed to transplantation with a marginal donor heart.Copyright © 2015 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*
,_underline_
or**bold**
. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>
and subscript<sub>text</sub>
. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3.
, hyphens-
or asterisks*
. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
- Images can be included with:
![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
- For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)
inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]
to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote.
.