Heart Institute, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio.
Heart Institute, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio.
J Heart Lung Transplant. 2015 Jan;34(1):82-88. doi: 10.1016/j.healun.2014.09.018. Epub 2014 Oct 14.
Earlier reviews have reported unacceptably high incidence of pediatric heart transplant (PHT) waiting list mortality. An increase in ventricular assist devices (VAD) suggests a potential positive effect. This study evaluated PHT waiting list mortality in the era of pediatric VADs.
United Network of Organ Sharing (UNOS) database from 1999 to 2012 showed 5,532 pediatric candidates (aged ≤ 18 years) actively listed for PHT: 2,191 were listed in 1999 to 2004 (Era 1) and 3,341 were listed in 2005 to 2012 (Era 2).
Waiting list mortality was lower in Era 2 (8%) vs Era 1 (16%; p < 0.001). VAD therapy was used more frequently in Era 2 (16%) than in Era 1 (6%; p < 0.001) and was associated with better waiting list survival (p < 0.001). There were more UNOS Status 1A patients in Era 2 (80%) vs Era 1 (68%; p < 0.001). Independent predictors of waiting list mortality included weight < 10 kg (odds ratio [OR], 2.7 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1-6.9), congenital heart disease diagnosis (OR, 2.4; 95% CI, 1.9-3.0), blood type O (OR, 2.2; 95% CI, 1.8-2.8)], extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (OR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.1-2.2), mechanical ventilation (OR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.4-2.3), and renal dysfunction (OR 1.6; 95% CI, 1.2-2.0). Independent predictors of survival on the waiting list included VAD therapy (OR 4.2; 95% CI, 2.4-7.6), cardiomyopathy diagnosis (OR 3.3; 95% CI, 2.4-4.6), blood type A (OR, 2.2; 95% CI, 1.8-2.8), UNOS list Status 1B (OR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.2-3.0), listed in Era 2 (OR 1.8; 95% CI, 1.4-2.2), and white race (OR 1.3; 95% CI, 1.1-1.6).
Despite an increase in the number of children listed as Status 1A, there was more than a 50% reduction in waiting list mortality in the new era. Irrespective of other factors, patients supported with a VAD were 4 times more likely to survive to transplant.
早期的综述报告表明,儿科心脏移植(PHT)候补名单的死亡率高得令人无法接受。心室辅助装置(VAD)的增加表明可能存在积极影响。本研究评估了儿科 VAD 时代 PHT 候补名单的死亡率。
1999 年至 2012 年期间,美国器官共享联合网络(UNOS)数据库显示有 5532 名儿科候选者(≤18 岁)积极列入 PHT 候补名单:1999 年至 2004 年(Era1)有 2191 人,2005 年至 2012 年(Era2)有 3341 人。
Era2 的候补名单死亡率(8%)低于 Era1(16%;p<0.001)。Era2 中更频繁地使用 VAD 治疗(16%比 Era1(6%;p<0.001),并与更好的候补名单生存率相关(p<0.001)。Era2 中有更多的 UNOS 状态 1A 患者(80%)比 Era1(68%;p<0.001)。候补名单死亡率的独立预测因素包括体重<10kg(比值比[OR],2.7;95%置信区间[CI],1.1-6.9)、先天性心脏病诊断(OR,2.4;95%CI,1.9-3.0)、血型 O(OR,2.2;95%CI,1.8-2.8)、体外膜氧合(OR,1.5;95%CI,1.1-2.2)、机械通气(OR,1.8;95%CI,1.4-2.3)和肾功能障碍(OR,1.6;95%CI,1.2-2.0)。候补名单上生存的独立预测因素包括 VAD 治疗(OR,4.2;95%CI,2.4-7.6)、心肌病诊断(OR,3.3;95%CI,2.4-4.6)、血型 A(OR,2.2;95%CI,1.8-2.8)、UNOS 列表状态 1B(OR,1.9;95%CI,1.2-3.0)、Era2 中列出(OR,1.8;95%CI,1.4-2.2)和白人种族(OR,1.3;95%CI,1.1-1.6)。
尽管列入状态 1A 的儿童人数有所增加,但在新时代,候补名单的死亡率仍下降了 50%以上。无论其他因素如何,使用 VAD 支持的患者存活到移植的可能性增加了 4 倍。