Changes in Use of Left Ventricular Assist Devices as Bridge to Transplantation With New Heart Allocation Policy

被引:86
|
作者
Mullan, Clancy W. [1 ]
Chouairi, Fouad [2 ]
Sen, Sounok [3 ]
Mori, Makoto [1 ]
Clark, Katherine A. A. [3 ]
Reinhardt, Samuel W. [3 ]
Miller, P. Elliott [3 ]
Fuery, Michael A. [2 ]
Jacoby, Daniel [3 ]
Maulion, Christopher [3 ]
Anwer, Muhammad [1 ]
Geirsson, Arnar [1 ]
Mulligan, David [4 ]
Formica, Richard [4 ,5 ]
Rogers, Joseph G. [6 ]
Desai, Nihar R. [3 ]
Ahmad, Tariq [3 ]
机构
[1] Yale Sch Med, Div Cardiac Surg, 330 Cedar St,BB 204,POB 208039, New Haven, CT 06510 USA
[2] Yale Sch Med, Dept Internal Med, New Haven, CT USA
[3] Yale Sch Med, Sect Cardiovasc Med, New Haven, CT USA
[4] Yale Sch Med, Div Transplantat, New Haven, CT USA
[5] Yale Sch Med, Sect Nephrol, New Haven, CT USA
[6] Duke Univ, Med Ctr, Div Cardiol, Durham, NC 27710 USA
关键词
bridge to transplantation; health policy; heart transplantation; left ventricular assist device; MEDICAL-MANAGEMENT; FAILURE PATIENTS;
D O I
10.1016/j.jchf.2021.01.010
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
OBJECTIVES The goal of this study was to describe outcomes of patients with bridge to heart transplantation (BTT) after changes were made to the donor heart allocation system. BACKGROUND Left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) have been used as a BTT. On October 18, 2018, the donor heart allocation system in the United States was updated. METHODS This study identified adults in the United Network for Organ Sharing database with durable, continuous-flow LVAD at listing or implanted while listed between April 2017 and April 2020. Baseline recipient and donor characteristics, waitlist survival, and post-transplantation outcomes were compared pre- and post-allocation system change. RESULTS A total of 1,794 patients met inclusion criteria: 983 in the pre-change period and 814 afterward. The number of patients listed with LVAD decreased nationally over time from 102 in April 2017 to 12 in April 2020 (p < 0.001). The proportion of patients with LVAD at time of transplant decreased from 47% to 14%. Before the change, the majority were Status 1A (75.8%) at transplantation; afterward, most were Status 2/3 (67.8%). Transplantation rates were not different (85.4% vs. 83.6%; p = 0.225), but waitlist time decreased in the post period (82 vs. 65 days; p = 0.004). Donors were more likely to be high risk (39.0% vs. 32.2%; p = 0.005), and both ischemic times and distance traveled increased (3.4 h vs. 3.1 h; p < 0.001; 199 miles vs. 82 miles; p < 0.001). Waitlist survival did not change, but post-transplantation survival was worse in patients with BTT post-change (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS The number of patients with BTT on the transplant list decreased steadily and dramatically after the allocation system change. Although time to transplant decreased, there was an increase in post-transplant mortality. These data suggest that the risks and benefits of LVAD implantation as a BTT have changed under the new allocation system and that the appropriate indication for this treatment strategy warrants a re-evaluation. (C) 2021 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation.
引用
收藏
页码:420 / 429
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Effects of changes in UNOS policy regarding left ventricular assist devices
    Morgan, JA
    Mazzeo, PA
    Flannery, MR
    Oz, MC
    Naka, Y
    JOURNAL OF HEART AND LUNG TRANSPLANTATION, 2004, 23 (05): : 620 - 622
  • [32] Left ventricular assist devices and United Network Organ Sharing heart allocation
    Pinney, Sean P.
    JOURNAL OF HEART AND LUNG TRANSPLANTATION, 2012, 31 (01): : 113 - 113
  • [33] Is continuous inotropic therapy an effective bridge to transplantation in heart failure patients needing left ventricular assist devices?
    Bhat, G
    Muncy, L
    TRANSPLANTATION, 2000, 69 (08) : S233 - S233
  • [34] Long-term continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices (LVAD) as bridge to heart transplantation
    Pozzi, Matteo
    Giraud, Raphael
    Tozzi, Piergiorgio
    Bendjelid, Karim
    Robin, Jacques
    Meyer, Philippe
    Obadia, Jean Francois
    Banfi, Carlo
    JOURNAL OF THORACIC DISEASE, 2015, 7 (03) : 532 - 542
  • [35] New role of ventricular assist devices as bridge to transplantation: European perspective
    Reineke, David C.
    Mohacsi, Paul J.
    CURRENT OPINION IN ORGAN TRANSPLANTATION, 2017, 22 (03) : 225 - 230
  • [36] Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation and Short-Term Left Ventricular Assist Devices Support as the Bridge to Heart Transplantation
    Krachak, V.
    Shestakova, L.
    Krachak, D.
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HEART FAILURE, 2017, 19 : 10 - 10
  • [37] Left ventricular assist device as bridge to heart transplantation: Single center experience with 2 devices in 35 patients
    Van Cleemput, Johan
    Droogne, Walter
    Bollen, Hilde
    Vanhaecke, Johan
    Meyns, Bart
    TRANSPLANT INTERNATIONAL, 2007, 20 : 161 - 161
  • [38] Ventricular Assist Devices as a Bridge to Heart Transplantation or as Destination Therapy in Pediatric Patients
    Brancaccio, G.
    Filippelli, S.
    Michielon, G.
    Iacobelli, R.
    Alfieri, S.
    Gandolfo, F.
    Pongiglione, G.
    Albanese, S.
    Perri, G.
    Parisi, F.
    Carotti, A.
    Amodeo, A.
    TRANSPLANTATION PROCEEDINGS, 2012, 44 (07) : 2007 - 2012
  • [39] Arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy: use of a left ventricular assist device as a bridge to transplantation?
    Mufti, Hani N.
    Rajda, Miroslaw
    Legare, Jean-Francois
    JOURNAL OF ARTIFICIAL ORGANS, 2013, 16 (04) : 498 - 500
  • [40] Left ventricular assist systems as a bridge to heart transplantation: The role and the strategy in Japan
    Nishimura, M
    Ohtake, S
    Sawa, Y
    Fukushima, N
    Yamaguchi, T
    Matsuda, H
    TRANSPLANTATION PROCEEDINGS, 1999, 31 (05) : 1997 - 1999