Clinical Outcomes of Cardiac Transplantation in Heart Failure Patients with Previous Mechanical Cardiocirculatory Support

Overview

Journal J Clin Med

Date 2025 Jan 11

PMID 39797356

Authors

Michele DAlonzo

Amedeo Terzi

Massimo Baudo

Mauro Ronzoni

Nicola Uricchio

Claudio Muneretto

Lorenzo Di Bacco

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Heart failure (HF) remains a significant public health issue, with heart transplantation (HT) being the gold standard treatment for end-stage HF. The increasing use of mechanical circulatory support, particularly left ventricular assist devices (LVADs), as a bridge to transplant (BTT), presents new perspectives for increasingly complex clinical scenarios. This study aimed to compare long-term clinical outcomes in patients in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) receiving an LVAD as BTT to those undergoing direct-to-transplant (DTT) without mechanical support, focusing on survival and post-transplant complications. A retrospective, single-center study included 105 patients who underwent HT from 2010. Patients were divided into two groups: BTT (n = 28) and DTT (n = 77). Primary endpoints included overall survival at 1 and 7 years post-HT. Secondary outcomes involved late complications, including organ rejection, renal failure, cardiac allograft vasculopathy (CAV), and cerebrovascular events. At HT, the use of LVADs results in longer cardiopulmonary bypass and cross-clamping times in the BTT group; nevertheless, surgical complexity does not affect 30-day mortality. Survival at 1 year was 89.3% for BTT and 85.7% for DTT ( = 0.745), while at 7 years, it was 80.8% and 77.1%, respectively ( = 0.840). No significant differences were observed in the incidence of major complications, including permanent dialysis, organ rejection, and CAV. However, a higher incidence of cerebrovascular events was noted in the BTT group (10.7% vs. 2.6%). LVAD use as BTT does not negatively impact early post-transplant survival compared to DTT. At long-term follow-up, clinical outcomes remained similar across groups, supporting LVADs as a viable option for bridging patients to transplant.

References

Rose E, Gelijns A, Moskowitz A, Heitjan D, Stevenson L, Dembitsky W . Long-term use of a left ventricular assist device for end-stage heart failure. N Engl J Med. 2002; 345(20):1435-43. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa012175. View

Zhou A, Etchill E, Shou B, Whitbread J, Barbur I, Giuliano K . Outcomes after heart transplantation in patients who have undergone a bridge-to-bridge strategy. JTCVS Open. 2023; 12:255-268. PMC: 9801290. DOI: 10.1016/j.xjon.2022.08.011. View

Yin M, Wever-Pinzon O, Mehra M, Selzman C, Toll A, Cherikh W . Post-transplant outcome in patients bridged to transplant with temporary mechanical circulatory support devices. J Heart Lung Transplant. 2019; 38(8):858-869. DOI: 10.1016/j.healun.2019.04.003. View

Miller L, Pagani F, Russell S, John R, Boyle A, Aaronson K . Use of a continuous-flow device in patients awaiting heart transplantation. N Engl J Med. 2007; 357(9):885-96. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa067758. View

Bull D, Reid B, Selzman C, Mesley R, Drakos S, Clayson S . The impact of bridge-to-transplant ventricular assist device support on survival after cardiac transplantation. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2010; 140(1):169-73. DOI: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2010.03.026. View

Dunlay S, Roger V, Killian J, Weston S, Schulte P, Subramaniam A . Advanced Heart Failure Epidemiology and Outcomes: A Population-Based Study. JACC Heart Fail. 2021; 9(10):722-732. PMC: 8487916. DOI: 10.1016/j.jchf.2021.05.009. View

Urban M, Pirk J, Dorazilova Z, Netuka I . How does successful bridging with ventricular assist device affect cardiac transplantation outcome?. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2011; 13(4):405-9. DOI: 10.1510/icvts.2011.273722. View

Magruder J, Grimm J, Crawford T, Tedford R, Russell S, Sciortino C . Survival After Orthotopic Heart Transplantation in Patients Undergoing Bridge to Transplantation With the HeartWare HVAD Versus the Heartmate II. Ann Thorac Surg. 2016; 103(5):1505-1511. DOI: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2016.08.060. View

Grimm J, Magruder J, Crawford T, Fraser 3rd C, Plum W, Sciortino C . Duration of Left Ventricular Assist Device Support Does Not Impact Survival After US Heart Transplantation. Ann Thorac Surg. 2016; 102(4):1206-12. DOI: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2016.04.022. View

10.

Chiu P, Schaffer J, Oyer P, Pham M, Banerjee D, Woo Y . Influence of durable mechanical circulatory support and allosensitization on mortality after heart transplantation. J Heart Lung Transplant. 2016; 35(6):731-42. PMC: 4955841. DOI: 10.1016/j.healun.2015.12.023. View

11.

Yuzefpolskaya M, Schroeder S, Houston B, Robinson M, Gosev I, Reyentovich A . The Society of Thoracic Surgeons Intermacs 2022 Annual Report: Focus on the 2018 Heart Transplant Allocation System. Ann Thorac Surg. 2022; 115(2):311-327. DOI: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2022.11.023. View

12.

Arnaoutakis G, George T, Kilic A, Weiss E, Russell S, Conte J . Effect of sensitization in US heart transplant recipients bridged with a ventricular assist device: update in a modern cohort. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2011; 142(5):1236-45, 1245.e1. PMC: 4150056. DOI: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2011.07.019. View

13.

Patlolla V, Patten R, DeNofrio D, Konstam M, Krishnamani R . The effect of ventricular assist devices on post-transplant mortality an analysis of the United network for organ sharing thoracic registry. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009; 53(3):264-71. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2008.08.070. View

14.

Kirklin J, Naftel D, Pagani F, Kormos R, Stevenson L, Blume E . Seventh INTERMACS annual report: 15,000 patients and counting. J Heart Lung Transplant. 2015; 34(12):1495-504. DOI: 10.1016/j.healun.2015.10.003. View

15.

El Nihum L, Manian N, Arunachalam P, Al Abri Q, Guha A . Renal Dysfunction in Patients with Left Ventricular Assist Device. Methodist Debakey Cardiovasc J. 2022; 18(4):19-26. PMC: 9461688. DOI: 10.14797/mdcvj.1146. View

16.

McDonagh T, Metra M, Adamo M, Gardner R, Baumbach A, Bohm M . 2021 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure: Developed by the Task Force for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). With the special.... Eur J Heart Fail. 2022; 24(1):4-131. DOI: 10.1002/ejhf.2333. View

17.

Stewart S, Winters G, Fishbein M, Tazelaar H, Kobashigawa J, Abrams J . Revision of the 1990 working formulation for the standardization of nomenclature in the diagnosis of heart rejection. J Heart Lung Transplant. 2005; 24(11):1710-20. DOI: 10.1016/j.healun.2005.03.019. View

18.

Fukuhara S, Takeda K, Polanco A, Takayama H, Naka Y . Prolonged continuous-flow left ventricular assist device support and posttransplantation outcomes: A new challenge. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2016; 151(3):872-880.e5. DOI: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2015.10.024. View

19.

Mehra M, Crespo-Leiro M, Dipchand A, Ensminger S, Hiemann N, Kobashigawa J . International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation working formulation of a standardized nomenclature for cardiac allograft vasculopathy-2010. J Heart Lung Transplant. 2010; 29(7):717-27. DOI: 10.1016/j.healun.2010.05.017. View

20.

Sohn S, Kang Y, Hwang H, Chee H . Optimal timing of heart transplantation in patients with an implantable left ventricular assist device. Korean J Transplant. 2023; 37(2):79-84. PMC: 10332290. DOI: 10.4285/kjt.23.0015. View