Derivation and validation of the bridge to transplantation with left ventricular assist device score for 1 year mortality after heart transplantation. The BTT-LVAD score.

BACKGROUND: To derive and validate a risk score that accurately predicts 1-year mortality after heart transplantation (HT) in patients bridged to transplant (BTT) with a left ventricular assist device (LVAD). METHODS: The UNOS database was queried to identify patients BTT with an LVAD between 2008 and 2018. Patients with ⩾1-year follow up were randomly divided into derivation (70%) and validation (30%) cohorts. The primary endpoint was 1-year mortality. A simple additive risk score was developed based on the odds of 1-year mortality after HT. Risk groups were created, and survival was estimated and compared. RESULTS: A total of 7759 patients were randomly assigned to derivation (n = 5431) and validation (n = 2328) cohorts. One-year post-transplant mortality was 9.8% (n = 760). A 33-point scoring was created from six recipient variables and two donor variables. Risk groups were classified as low (0-5), intermediate (6-10), and high (>10). In the validation cohort, the predicted 1-year mortality was significantly higher in the high-risk group than the intermediate and low-risk groups, 14.7% versus 9% versus 6.1% respectively (log-rank test: p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: The BTT-LVAD Score can serve as a clinical decision tool to guide therapeutic decisions in advanced heart failure patients.

Adverse Events After Left Atrial Appendage Closure: Lessons Learned From the Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) Database.

Left atrial appendage (LAA) closure devices are alternative treatments recently approved for patients with atrial fibrillation. Due to the novelty of these devices, limited postapproval surveillance data on LAA closure devices have been published. Thus, we analyzed the United States Food and Drug Administration Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database to report these findings. The primary endpoint was final event outcome, and secondary endpoints included management strategies of reported events.

Racial disparities and outcomes of left ventricular assist device implantation as a bridge to heart transplantation.

AIMS: This study investigated outcomes after continuous flow left ventricular assist device (CF-LVAD) implantation as bridge to heart transplantation (BTT) in advanced heart failure patients stratified by race. METHODS AND RESULTS: De-identified data from the United Network for Organ Sharing database was obtained for all patients who had a CF-LVAD as BTT from 2008 to 2018. Patients were stratified into four groups on the basis of ethnicity [Caucasian, African American (AA), Hispanic, and others (Asian, Pacific Islanders, and American Indian)]. Outcomes investigated were waitlist mortality or delisting and post-transplant 5 year survival. Cox proportional hazards modelling was used to identify independent predictors of waitlist mortality or delisting and post-transplant survival. We used Kaplan-Meier survival curves and the log-rank test to estimate and compare survival among groups. A total of 14 234 patients who had CF-LVADs as BTT were identified. Of these, 64% (n = 9058) were Caucasians, 26% (n = 3677) were AA, 7% (n = 997) were Hispanic, and 3% (n = 502) had a different race. Compared with Caucasian, AA, and Hispanic patients had higher body mass indexes and a lower level of education and are more likely to be public health insurance beneficiaries. There was a significantly lower incidence of transplantation in AAs compared with Caucasians, Hispanics, and others at 12, 24, and 60 months, respectively (Gray's test, P < 0.001). The AA race was a significant predictor of waitlist mortality or delisting owing to worsening clinical status [hazard ratio, 95% confidence interval: 1.10 (1.01 to 1.16; P < 0.001)]. Among those who were successfully BTT, risk-adjusted post-transplant survival was similar among the four groups (log-rank test: P = 0.589). CONCLUSIONS: Disparities exist among different races that receive a CF-LVAD as a BTT. These disparities translate into increased waitlist morbidity and mortality but not long-term post-transplant survival among those who successfully reach transplant.

Discharge disposition of older patients undergoing trans-catheter aortic valve replacement and its impact on survival.

BACKGROUND: Patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are likely to be discharged to a location other than home. We aimed to assess the association between discharge disposition after TAVR and patient survival at 1 year. METHODS: Patients admitted from home and survived till discharge after TAVR were divided into two groups based on discharge disposition (home discharge vs. non-home discharge). Pre-operative factors predicting the odds of not being discharged home were identified by using multivariable logistic regression analysis. Study patients were matched one-to-one via a propensity scoring method. Differences in procedural outcomes were compared. Survival of both unmatched and matched pairs was evaluated by using the Kaplan-Meier method with the Kleine-Moesch-Berger stratified log-rank test. RESULTS: Out of 1,160 TAVR patients, 851 were admitted from home and survived till discharge. The incidence non-home discharge was 19% (n = 159). Factors that were significantly associated with non-home discharge were older age, non-transfemoral approach, female sex, frailty status, history of chronic lung disease, pacemaker placement and insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. One-to-one propensity score matching resulted in 141 patient pairs with similar age, operative risk, frailty and functional status. At 1-year follow-up, all-cause mortality rates were significantly higher in the non-home group than their home counterparts (18% vs. 3%, P = 0.006; stratified log rank test: P = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: A considerable number of TAVR patients are discharged to a location other than home after the procedure. Not being discharged home after TAVR is associated with a high mortality risk at 1 year.

Prophylactic use of the implantable cardioverter-defibrillator and its effect on the long-term survival, cardiovascular and sudden cardiac death in nonischemic cardiomyopathy patients-a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) has shown to reduce sudden cardiac death and overall mortality in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy. The recently published DANISH trial has shown conflicting outcomes on the long-term survival in patients with prophylactic implantation of ICD in Non-Ischemic Cardiomyopathy (NICM). Two independent reviewers searched MEDLINE, PUBMED, Ovid, CINAHL, clinicaltrials.gov , and Cochrane Registry for randomized control trials (RCT's) comparing ICD to medical treatment (MT). Six RCT's enrolling 3389 patients (ICD = 1554 and MT = 1835) were included for final analysis. The primary outcomes were mortality comparing ICD to MT, 231 vs 337 (OR = 0.74, CI = 0.62-0.90, p = 0.002, and I2 = 0%) favoring ICD. On comparing to amiodarone only, there were 47 deaths in the ICD arm vs 71 deaths in amiodarone arm, (OR = 0.66, CI = 0.44-0.98, p = 0.04, I2 0%), to placebo and usual care only (excluding amiodarone); there were 225 deaths in ICD patients compared to 266 in the placebo and usual care arm, (OR = 0.73, CI = 0.59-0.92, p = 0.007, I2 = 15%). The results of our analysis from these six RCTs clearly support the ongoing benefit of prophylactic ICD implantation and support current recommendations for ICD implantation in NICM patients. More RCT's at a larger scale are needed to further elucidate benefits of both ICD and CRT-D in this post PARADIGM era where MT is at a pinnacle in reducing morbidity and mortality in heart failure patients.