Ischemic Versus Nonischemic Dilated Cardiomyopathy: The Implications of Heart Failure Etiology on Left Ventricular Assist Device Outcomes

The effect of heart failure etiology on outcomes after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation has not been fully investigated. The aim of this study was to compare postoperative survival, incidence of LVAD-related complications, left and right heart catheterizations, and echocardiographic findings in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM) and nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy (NIDCM) who underwent continuous-flow LVAD implantation. A total of 100 patients underwent implantation of a HeartMate II (Thoratec Corp., Pleasanton, CA) or HeartWare (HeartWare Inc., Framingham, MA) LVAD at our institution. Patients were stratified into two groups based on the etiology of heart failure, ICM and NIDCM. We identified 34 (34.0%) patients with ICM and 66 (66.0%) with NIDCM. Patients with ICM were significantly older (59.5 vs. 49.3; p < 0.001) and had higher rates of hypertension (91.2% vs. 84.8%; p = 0.021), chronic renal insufficiency (38.2% vs. 25.8%; p < 0.001), peripheral vascular disease (11.8% vs. 10.6%; p = 0.015), and previous cardiac surgery (58.8% vs. 13.6%; p < 0.001). Survival was similar for both groups with 30 day, 6 month, and 1 year survivals of 94.1%, 85.3%, and 82.4%, respectively, for ICM patients versus 95.5%, 92.4%, and 89.4%, respectively, for NIDCM patients (p = 0.743). Etiology of heart failure was not an independent predictor of survival in multivariate logistic regression analysis (p = 0.505). Post-LVAD complications and improvements in postoperative hemodynamic measurements were also similar for both groups. The etiology of heart failure did not appear to affect postoperative outcomes significantly ASAIO Journal 2013;59:130-135.