Impact of Temporary Percutaneous Mechanical Circulatory Support Before Transplantation in the 2018 Heart Allocation System

被引:24
|
作者
Clerkin, Kevin J. [1 ]
Salako, Oluwafeyijimi [1 ]
Fried, Justin A. [1 ]
Griffin, Jan M. [1 ]
Raikhelkar, Jayant [1 ]
Jain, Rashmi [1 ]
Restaino, Susan [1 ]
Colombo, Paolo C. [1 ]
Takeda, Koji [2 ]
Farr, Maryjane A. [1 ]
Sayer, Gabriel [1 ]
Uriel, Nir [1 ]
Topkara, Veli K. [1 ]
机构
[1] Columbia Univ, Vagelos Coll Phys & Surg, Dept Med, Milstein Div Cardiol, New York, NY 10032 USA
[2] Columbia Univ, Vagelos Coll Phys & Surg, Dept Surg, Div Cardiac Surg, New York, NY 10032 USA
关键词
2018 allocation policy; heart transplant; mechanical circulatory support; outcomes; UNOS;
D O I
10.1016/j.jchf.2021.08.003
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
OBJECTIVES This analysis sought to investigate the waitlist and post-transplant outcomes of individuals bridged to transplantation by using temporary percutaneous endovascular mechanical circulatory support (tMCS) through a status 2 designation (cardiogenic shock and exception). BACKGROUND The 2018 donor heart allocation policy change granted a status 2 designation to patients supported with tMCS. METHODS Adult patients in the United Network for Organ Sharing registry after October 18, 2018 who received a status 2 designation for tMCS were included and grouped by their status 2 criteria: cardiogenic shock with hemodynamic criteria (CS-HD), cardiogenic shock without hemodynamic criteria before tMCS (CS-woHD), and exception. Baseline characteristics, waitlist events (death and delisting), and post-transplant outcomes were compared. RESULTS A total of 2,279 patients met inclusion criteria: 68.6% (n =1,564) with CS-HD, 3.2% (n = 73) with CS-woHD, and 28.2% (n = 642) with exceptions. A total of 64.2% of patients underwent heart transplantation within 14 days of status 2 listing or upgrade, and 1.9% died or were delisted for worsening clinical condition. Among the 35.8% who did not undergo transplantation following 14 days, only 2.8% went on to receive a left ventricular assist device (LVAD). The 30-day transplantation likelihood was similar among groups: 80.1% for the CS-HD group vs 79.7% for the exception group vs 73.3% for the CS-woHD group; P = 0.31. However, patients who met criteria for CS-woHD had 2.3-fold greater risk of death or delisting (95% CI: 1.10-4.75; P = 0.03) compared with CS-HD patients after multivariable adjustment. Pre-tMCS hemodynamics were not associated with adverse waitlist events. CONCLUSIONS The use of tMCS is an efficient, safe, and effective strategy as a bridge to transplantation; however, patients with CS-woHD may represent a high-risk cohort. Transition to a durable LVAD was a rare event in this group. (J Am Coll Cardiol HF 2022;10:12-23) (c) 2022 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation.
引用
收藏
页码:12 / 23
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Association of center-level temporary mechanical circulatory support use and waitlist outcomes after the 2018 adult heart allocation policy
    Kim, Samuel T.
    Tran, Zachary
    Xia, Yu
    Mabeza, Russyan
    Hernandez, Roland
    Benharash, Peyman
    SURGERY, 2022, 172 (03) : 844 - 850
  • [32] Sex-Specific Trends in the Use of Temporary Mechanical Circulatory Support in Patients Listed for Orthotopic Heart Transplant Before and After The UNOS Allocation System Change
    Cyrille, N.
    Garcia, R.
    White, B. N.
    Danford, D. S.
    Harmon, L.
    Bernardo, S.
    Rose, H.
    Patel, S.
    DeVore, A. D.
    Nandkeolyar, S.
    Mishkin, J.
    JOURNAL OF HEART AND LUNG TRANSPLANTATION, 2024, 43 (04): : S217 - S218
  • [33] MECHANICAL CIRCULATORY SUPPORT AND HEART-TRANSPLANTATION
    HETZER, R
    HENNIG, E
    SCHIESSLER, A
    FRIEDEL, N
    WARNECKE, H
    ADT, M
    JOURNAL OF HEART AND LUNG TRANSPLANTATION, 1992, 11 (04): : S175 - S181
  • [34] Mechanical circulatory support until heart transplantation
    Loebe, M
    Theodoridis, V
    Hetzer, R
    QUALITY OF LIFE AND PSYCHOSOMATICS: IN MECHANICAL CIRCULATION, THE HEART TRANSPLANTATION, 1998, : 1 - 16
  • [35] Heart transplantation after mechanical circulatory support
    Wang, SS
    Chou, NK
    Hsu, RB
    Chen, YS
    Ko, WJ
    Chu, SH
    TRANSPLANTATION PROCEEDINGS, 2000, 32 (07) : 1527 - 1528
  • [36] Mechanical circulatory support after heart transplantation
    Mihaljevic, Tomislav
    Jarrett, Craig M.
    Gonzalez-Stawinski, Gonzalo
    Smedira, Nicholas G.
    Nowicki, Edward R.
    Thuita, Lucy
    Mountis, Maria
    Blackstone, Eugene H.
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CARDIO-THORACIC SURGERY, 2012, 41 (01) : 200 - 206
  • [37] Heart Transplantation in an Era of Mechanical Circulatory Support
    Kwak, Jenny
    Majewski, Michael
    LeVan, Pierre T.
    JOURNAL OF CARDIOTHORACIC AND VASCULAR ANESTHESIA, 2018, 32 (01) : 19 - 31
  • [38] Heart transplantation after mechanical circulatory support
    Buz, S
    Drews, T
    Weng, Y
    Muller, J
    Hummel, M
    Loebe, M
    Hetzer, R
    TRANSPLANTATION PROCEEDINGS, 2000, 32 (03) : 583 - 584
  • [39] Temporary Circulatory Support in US Children Awaiting Heart Transplantation
    Yarlagadda, Vamsi V.
    Maeda, Katsuhide
    Zhang, Yulin
    Chen, Sharon
    Dykes, John C.
    Gowen, Mary Alice
    Shuttleworth, Paul
    Murray, Jenna M.
    Shin, Andrew Y.
    Reinhartz, Olaf
    Rosenthal, David N.
    McElhinney, Doff B.
    Almond, Christopher S.
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY, 2017, 70 (18) : 2250 - 2260
  • [40] Temporary mechanical circulatory support after orthotopic heart transplantation: a single-centre experience
    Tchantchaleishvili, Vakhtang
    Wood, Katherine L.
    Carlson, Laura A.
    Barrus, Bryan
    Swartz, Michael F.
    Vidula, Himabindu
    Lehoux, Juan M.
    Massey, H. Todd
    Chen, Leway
    INTERACTIVE CARDIOVASCULAR AND THORACIC SURGERY, 2017, 25 (01) : 41 - 46