Clerkin Kevin J, Topkara Veli K, Mancini Donna M, Yuzefpolskaya Melana, Demmer Ryan T, Dizon Jose M, Takeda Koji, Takayama Hiroo, Naka Yoshifumi, Colombo Paolo C, Garan A Reshad
Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York, New York.
Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York.
J Heart Lung Transplant. 2017 Jun;36(6):633-639. doi: 10.1016/j.healun.2016.11.008. Epub 2016 Dec 1.
Implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) provide a significant mortality benefit for appropriately selected patients with advanced heart failure. ICDs are associated with a mortality benefit when used in patients with a pulsatile left ventricular assist device (LVAD). It is unclear whether patients with a continuous-flow LVAD (CF-LVAD) derive the same benefit. We sought to determine if the presence of an ICD provided a mortality benefit during CF-LVAD support as a bridge to transplantation.
Patients were identified in the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) registry who underwent LVAD implantation as bridge to transplantation between May 2004 and April 2014, with follow-up through June 2014. Primary outcome was freedom from death while on CF-LVAD support with adjustment for complications requiring UNOS listing status upgrade. Secondary end-points included freedom from delisting while on CF-LVAD support and incidence of transplantation.
The study cohort comprised 2,990 patients, and propensity score matching identified 1,012 patients with similar propensity scores. There was no difference in survival during device support between patients with and without an ICD (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.20; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.66-2.17; p = 0.55). Adjusting for device complications requiring a UNOS listing status upgrade had minimal influence (HR = 1.11; 95% CI, 0.60-2.05; p = 0.74). There was no increased risk of delisting owing to being too sick for patients with an ICD (HR = 1.08; 95% CI, 0.63-1.86; p = 0.78). Likewise, the probability of transplantation was similar (HR = 1.05; 95% CI, 0.87-1.27; p = 0.62).
Among patients bridged to transplantation with a CF-LVAD, the presence of an ICD did not reduce mortality.
植入式心律转复除颤器(ICD)可为适当选择的晚期心力衰竭患者带来显著的死亡率降低益处。当用于使用搏动性左心室辅助装置(LVAD)的患者时,ICD与死亡率降低益处相关。目前尚不清楚使用连续血流LVAD(CF-LVAD)的患者是否能获得同样的益处。我们试图确定ICD的存在是否能在CF-LVAD支持作为移植桥梁期间带来死亡率降低的益处。
在器官共享联合网络(UNOS)登记处中识别出在2004年5月至2014年4月期间接受LVAD植入作为移植桥梁的患者,并随访至2014年6月。主要结局是在CF-LVAD支持下免于死亡,并根据需要升级UNOS登记状态的并发症进行调整。次要终点包括在CF-LVAD支持下免于被除名以及移植发生率。
研究队列包括2990名患者,倾向评分匹配确定了1012名倾向评分相似的患者。有ICD和无ICD的患者在装置支持期间的生存率无差异(风险比[HR]=1.20;95%置信区间[CI],0.66-2.17;p=0.55)。对需要升级UNOS登记状态的装置并发症进行调整的影响最小(HR=1.11;95%CI,0.60-2.05;p=0.74)。有ICD的患者因病情过重而被除名的风险没有增加(HR=1.08;95%CI,0.63-1.86;p=0.78)。同样,移植的概率相似(HR=1.05;95%CI,0.87-1.27;p=0.62)。
在使用CF-LVAD作为移植桥梁的患者中,ICD的存在并未降低死亡率。