ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To assess the benefit of proactive palliative medicine consultation for delineation of goals of care and quality-of-life preferences before implantation of left ventricular assist devices as destination therapy (DT). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the cases of patients who received DT between January 15, 2009, and January 1, 2010. RESULTS: Of 19 patients identified, 13 (68%) received proactive palliative medicine consultation. Median time of palliative medicine consultation was 1 day before DT implantation (range, 5 days before to 16 days after). Thirteen patients (68%) completed advance directives. The DT implantation team and families reported that preimplantation discussions and goals of care planning made postoperative care more clear and that adverse events were handled more effectively. Currently, palliative medicine involvement in patients receiving DT is viewed as routine by cardiac care specialists. CONCLUSION: Proactive palliative medicine consultation for patients being considered for or being treated with DT improves advance care planning and thus contributes to better overall care of these patients. Our experience highlights focused advance care planning, thorough exploration of goals of care, and expert symptom management and end-of-life care when appropriate.
Subject(s)
Advance Care Planning , Advance Directives , Heart Failure/therapy , Heart-Assist Devices , Palliative Care/methods , Quality of Life , Referral and Consultation , Aged , Decision Making , Family , Female , Humans , Interdisciplinary Communication , Male , Middle Aged , Patient Care Team , Retrospective Studies , Severity of Illness Index , Ventricular Dysfunction, Left/therapy , Ventricular Dysfunction, Right/therapy , Withholding TreatmentABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To describe a series of patients with heart failure supported with a ventricular assist device (VAD) who requested (or whose surrogates requested) withdrawal of VAD support and the legal and ethical aspects pertaining to these requests. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of patients at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, from March 1, 2003, through January 31, 2009, who requested (or whose surrogates requested) withdrawal of VAD support and for whom the requests were fulfilled. We then explored the legal and ethical permissibility of carrying out such requests. RESULTS: The median age of the 14 patients identified (13 men, 1 woman) was 57 years. Requests were made by 2 patients and 12 surrogates. None of the patients' available advance directives mentioned the VAD. For 11 patients, multidisciplinary care conferences were held before withdrawal of VAD support. Only 1 patient had an ethics consultation. All 14 patients died within 1 day of withdrawal of VAD support. CONCLUSION: Patients have the right to refuse or request the withdrawal of any unwanted treatment, and we argue that this right extends to VAD support. We also argue that the cause of death in these cases is the underlying heart disease, not assisted suicide or euthanasia. Therefore, patients with heart failure supported with VADs or their surrogates may request withdrawal of this treatment. In our view, carrying out such requests is permissible in accordance with the principles that apply to withdrawing other life-sustaining treatments.
