Prior Sternotomy and Ventricular Assist Device Implantation Do Not Adversely Impact Survival or Allograft Function After Heart Transplantation.

Orthotopic heart transplantation (OHT) remains the gold standard for end-stage heart failure. However, donor availability is severely limited. With a median wait time of 6.6 months and more than 12% of patients waiting 5 or more years, the decision is often made to implant a left ventricular assist device (LVAD) as a bridge to transplantation for medical stabilization. Furthermore, the number of patients who have had at least one prior sternotomy while awaiting transplantation is increasing. Previous studies have indicated reoperative sternotomy as a risk factor for compromised survival. Concerns are specifically focused on perioperative, short-term, and long-term outcomes after LVAD explantation or redo sternotomy before OHT because of increasing operative complexity. We hypothesize that despite the greater technical difficulty caused by LVAD explantation or redo sternotomy, outcomes would not be compromised. We retrospectively analyzed patients who underwent OHT at the University of Pennsylvania during a 5-year period (2008-2013; n = 253). All patients who underwent a bridge to transplantation LVAD (n = 72) or prior sternotomy (n = 65) were compared with those undergoing OHT with a virgin chest (n = 116). Preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative variables were analyzed. Short- and long-term survival were studied (minimum follow-up, 6 months). Comorbidities were similar among the groups. There was no difference in donor allograft ischemic time (p = 0.6). However, cardiopulmonary bypass time was longer in both bridge to transplantation and prior sternotomy cohorts (p < 0.00001). The blood transfusion requirement was higher in bridge to transplantation (12.5 ± 13.7 units; p = 0.0007) and prior sternotomy groups (11.7 ± 12.9 units; p = 0.02) as compared with the virgin chest cohort (7.1 ± 10.7 units). For bridge to transplantation, both time to extubation (1.0 ± 1.6 versus 0.9 ± 1.0 days; p = 0.03) and intensive care unit length of stay (7.0 ± 7.0 versus 6.0 ± 7.0 days; p = 0.06) were longer compared with the virgin chest cohort. The same was true for prior sternotomy (extubation time, 1.9 ± 4.4 days; p = 0.005; intensive care unit length of stay, 8.0 ± 12.0 days; p = 0.06). There was no difference in hospital length of stay (p = 0.2). Overall, there was no difference in short- or long-term survival. Implantation of an LVAD as a bridge to transplantation or prior sternotomy does not adversely impact allograft function, hospital length of stay, or long-term outcomes after OHT. The decision to manage a patient medically while awaiting transplantation versus an LVAD bridge strategy should not be limited by concerns of subsequent poor outcomes after transplantation.

Gaffey AC ，Phillips EC ，Howard J ，Hung G ，Han J ，Emery R ，Goldberg L ，Acker MA ，Woo YJ ，Atluri P ... -  《-》

Post-cardiac transplant survival after support with a continuous-flow left ventricular assist device: impact of duration of left ventricular assist device support and other variables.

John R ，Pagani FD ，Naka Y ，Boyle A ，Conte JV ，Russell SD ，Klodell CT ，Milano CA ，Rogers J ，Farrar DJ ，Frazier OH ... -  《-》

Outcomes after implantation of partial-support left ventricular assist devices in inotropic-dependent patients: Do we still need full-support assist devices?

Sabashnikov A ，Popov AF ，Bowles CT ，Mohite PN ，Weymann A ，Hards R ，Hedger M ，Wittwer T ，Wippermann J ，Wahlers T ，Schoendube FA ，Simon AR ... -  《-》

Redo sternotomy versus left ventricular assist device explant as risk factors for early mortality following heart transplantation.

There is an increasing proportion of patients with a previous sternotomy (PS) or durable left ventricular assist device (LVAD) undergoing heart transplantation (HT). We hypothesized that patients with LVAD support at the time of HT have a lower risk than patients with PS and may have a comparable risk to patients with a virgin chest (VC). This is a single-centre retrospective cohort study of all adults who underwent primary single-organ HT between 2002 and 2017. Multivariable Cox regression analyses were performed to compare 30-day and 1-year mortality between transplanted patients with a VC (VC-HT), a PS (PS-HT) or an LVAD explant (LVAD-HT). Three hundred seventy-nine patients were analysed (VC-HT: 196, PS-HT: 94, LVAD-HT: 89). A larger proportion of patients in the LVAD-HT group were males (83%), had blood group O (52%), non-ischaemic aetiology (70%) and sensitization (67%). The PS-HT group had a higher frequency of patients with congenital heart disease (30%) and PSs compared to LVAD-HT patients (P < 0.001). PS-HT and LVAD-HT patients required a longer bypass time (P < 0.001) and showed a greater estimated blood loss (P < 0.001). Postoperatively, LVAD-HT required haemodialysis more frequently than the VC-HT group (P = 0.031). Multivariable analyses found that PS-HT patients had increased 30-day mortality compared to VC-HT [hazard ratio (HR) 2.63, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.15-6.01; P = 0.022] while LVAD-HT did not (HR 2.17, 95% CI 0.96-4.93; P = 0.064). At 1-year, neither PS-HT nor LVAD-HT groups were significantly associated with increased mortality compared to VC-HT. Transplants in recipients with PS-HT demonstrated increased early mortality compared to VC-HT patients. Although LVAD explant is often technically challenging, this population demonstrated similar mortality compared to those VC-HT patients. The chronic and perioperative support provided by the LVAD may play a favourable role in early patient outcomes compared to other redo sternotomy patients.

Ribeiro RVP ，Alvarez JS ，Fukunaga N ，Yu F ，Adamson MB ，Foroutan F ，Cusimano RJ ，Yau T ，Ross H ，Alba AC ，Billia F ，Badiwala MV ，Rao V ... -  《-》

Should patients 60 years and older undergo bridge to transplantation with continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices?

Although left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) are now commonly used as a bridge to orthotopic heart transplantation (OHT), the upper patient age limit for this therapy has not been defined. Smaller studies have suggested that advanced age should not be a contraindication to bridge to transplantation (BTT) LVAD placement. The purpose of this study was to examine outcomes in patients 60 years and older undergoing BTT with continuous-flow LVADs. The United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) database was reviewed to identify first-time OHT recipients 60 years of age and older (2005-2010). Patients were stratified by preoperative support: continuous-flow LVAD, intravenous inotropic agents, and direct transplantation. Survival after OHT was modeled using the Kaplan-Meier method. All-cause mortality was examined using multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression. Of 2,554 patients, 1,142 (44.7%) underwent direct transplantation, 264 (10.3%) had LVAD BTT, and 1,148 (45.0%) had BTT with inotropic agents. The mean age was 64±3 years, and 460 (18.0%) patients were women. Mean follow-up was 29±19 months. Survival differed significantly among the 3 groups. Patients with LVAD BTT had significantly lower survival after OHT compared with the other groups at 30 days and 1 year. This survival difference was no longer significant at 2 years after OHT or when deaths in the first 30 days were censored. LVAD BTT increased the hazard of death at 1 year by 50% (hazard ratio [HR], 1.50; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05-2.15; p=0.03), compared with patients who underwent direct transplantation. This study represents the largest modern cohort in which survival after OHT has been evaluated in patients 60 years or older who received BTT. Older patients have lower short-term survival after OHT when BTT is carried out with a continuous-flow LVAD compared with inotropic agents or direct transplantation.

Allen JG ，Kilic A ，Weiss ES ，Arnaoutakis GJ ，George TJ ，Shah AS ，Conte JV ... -  《-》