ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Several factors affect heart transplant (HTx) and lung transplant (LTx) program outcomes. Variabilities in institutional and community characteristics have been shown to influence survival. At present, half of HTx centers in the United States do not possess a concomitant LTx program. This study sought to better understand the characteristics of HTx with and without LTx programs. METHODS: Nationwide transplant data were collected from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) in August 2020. SRTR star rating ranges from tier 1 (lowest) to tier 5 (highest). HTx volumes and SRTR star ratings for survival were compared between the centers with heart-only (H0) programs and the centers with heart-lung (HL) programs. RESULTS: SRTR star ratings were available for 117 transplant centers with one or more HTx reported. The median number of HTx performed over 1 year was 16 (interquartile range [IQR]: 2-29). The number of HL centers (n = 67, 57.3%) were comparable to H0 centers (n = 50, 42.7%; p = 0.14). The HTx volume at the HL centers (28 [IQR: 17-41]) exceeded the HTx volume at the H0 centers (13 [IQR: 9-23]; p < 0.01), but were comparable to the LTx volume at the HL centers (31 [IQR: 16-46]; p = 0.25). The median HTx one-year survival rating was 3 (IQR: 2-4) at both the H0 and HL centers (p = 0.85). The HTx and LTx volumes were positively associated with the respective 1-year survivals (p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: While the presence of an LTx program is not directly associated with HTx survival, it has a positive association with the HTx volume. The HTx and LTx volumes are positively associated with the 1-year survival.
ABSTRACT
Background: Surgical ventricular reconstruction (SVR) has been used to control adverse ventricular remodeling and improve cardiac function in ischemic cardiomyopathy. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to collect and analyze all available evidence on the utilization and efficacy of SVR. Methods: An electronic database search was performed to identify all retrospective and prospective studies on SVR for ischemic cardiomyopathy in the English literature from 2000 through 2020. A total of 92 articles with a collective 7,685 patients undergoing SVR were included in the final analysis. Results: The mean patient age was 61 years (95% CI: 59-63) and 80% (78-82%) were male. Congestive heart failure was present in 66% (54-78%) and angina in 58% (45-70%). Concomitant coronary artery bypass grafting was undertaken in 92% (90-93%) while 21% (18-24%) underwent mitral valve repair. Pre vs. post-SVR, significant improvement was seen in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) [29.9% (28.8-31.2%) vs. 40.9% (39.4-42.4%), P<0.01], left ventricular end-systolic (LVESD) and end-diastolic diameters (LVEDD) [LVESD: 49.9 mm (48.1-51.7) vs. 45 mm (42.8-47.3), P<0.01, LVEDD: 63.8 mm (62-65.6) vs. 58.23 mm (56.6-60), P<0.01], and left ventricular end-systolic (LVESVI) and end-diastolic volume indices (LVEDVI) [LVESVI: 83.9 mL/m2 (79.3-88.4) vs. 46.8 mL/m2 (43.5-50.1), P<0.01; LVEDVI: 119.9 mL/m2 (112.1-127.6) vs. 79.6 mL/m2 (73.6-85.7), P<0.01]. Mean New York Heart Association class improved from 3 (2.8-3.1) to 1.8 (1.5-2) (P<0.01). The 30-day mortality was 4% (3-5%) while late mortality was 19% (9-34%) at a mean follow-up of 27.5 [21-34] months. Conclusions: In patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy, SVR reduces left ventricular volumes and improves systolic function leading to symptomatic improvement.
