Comparison of In-Hospital Outcomes of Patients With-Versus-Without Ischemic Cardiomyopathy Undergoing Left Ventricular Assist Device Placement.

The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of heart failure (HF) etiology (ischemic cardiomyopathy [ICM] versus nonischemic cardiomyopathy) on in-hospital outcomes in patients undergoing left ventricular assist device (LVAD) placement using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample database. We identified patients who underwent LVAD placement from 2011 to 2014. The primary end point was the effect of ICM on in-hospital mortality. Secondary end points included periprocedural vascular complications requiring surgery, postoperative myocardial infarction, stroke, and hemorrhage requiring transfusion. We also assessed length of stay and cost of hospitalization. A mixed effects logistic model was used for clinical end points and a linear mixed model was used for cost and length of stay. In 3,511 patients who underwent LVAD placement (23.32% women and 56.23 ± 13.51 years old), the incidence of ICM was 53.5%. After adjusting for patient- and hospital-level characteristics, ICM was not found to influence in-hospital mortality (odds ratio [OR] 0.98, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.78 to 1.23). ICM was associated with an increased risk in periprocedural hemorrhage requiring transfusion (OR 1.29, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.53), vascular complications requiring surgery (OR 1.58 95% CI 1.10 to 2.28) and postoperative ST-segment myocardial infarction (OR 7.38 95% CI 5.33 to 10.24). In conclusion, ICM did not impact in-hospital mortality in patients who underwent LVAD placement but was associated with increased vascular complications, hemorrhage requiring transfusion, and postoperative myocardial infarction.

Clinical Impact of Diabetes Mellitus on Short-Term Outcomes andIn-Hospital Mortality of Cardiac Mechanical Support with Left Ventricular Assist Device (LVAD): A Retrospective Study from a National Database.

BACKGROUND: Cardiac support with left ventricular assist devices (LVAD) is a growing field. LVAD are increasingly used for patients with advanced congestive heart failure. Multiple studies have evaluated the outcomes of cardiac support with LVAD in patients with and without diabetes mellitus (DM), yet we still have conflicting results. This study aimed to assess the clinical impact of diabetes mellitus on patients undergoing cardiac support with LVAD. METHODS: Diabetic patients who underwent mechanical support with LVAD between 2011 and 2014 were identified in the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database using the International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM). The primary outcome was the effect of diabetes mellitus on inpatient mortality. Secondary outcomes were the impact of diabetes on other immediate post-LVAD complications and the cost of hospitalization. Multivariable logistic regression models analysis was performed to address potential confounding. RESULTS: After adjusting for patient-level and hospital-level characteristics, diabetic patients who underwent cardiac support with LVAD have no significant increase in in-hospital mortality (OR: 0.79, 95% CI (0.57-1.10), p = 0.166), post-LVAD short-term complications and cost of hospitalization (OR: 0.97, 95% CI (0.93-1.01), p = 0.102). CONCLUSION: Cardiac mechanical support with LVAD implantation is feasible and relatively safe in patients with diabetes and stage-D heart failure as a bridge for transplantation or as destination therapy for patients who are not candidates for transplantation. However, further trials and studies using bigger study sample and more comprehensive databases, need to be conducted for a stronger and more valid evidence.