Institute of Internal Medicine (A.A.J., G.D.), Allegheny General Hospital, Pittsburgh, PA.
Cardiovascular Institute (A.A.J., A.K., C.M.A., I.G.P., S.M., R.L.B., M.K., A.R.), Allegheny General Hospital, Pittsburgh, PA.
Circ Heart Fail. 2019 Sep;12(9):e006082. doi: 10.1161/CIRCHEARTFAILURE.119.006082. Epub 2019 Sep 13.
Women comprise approximately one-third of the advanced heart failure population but may receive fewer advanced heart failure therapies including left ventricular assist devices (LVADs). During the early pulsatile-flow device era, women had higher post-LVAD mortality and increased complications. However, knowledge about these differences in the continuous-flow device era is limited. Therefore, we sought to explore temporal trends in LVAD utilization and post-LVAD mortality by sex.
Patients with LVAD implantation from 2004 to 2016 were identified using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample. Trends in LVAD utilization and post-LVAD inpatient mortality were compared by sex and device era. Although LVADs are being increasingly utilized for patients with advanced systolic heart failure, women continue to represent a smaller proportion of LVAD recipients-25.8% in 2004 to 21.9% in 2016 ( for trend, 0.91). Women had increased inpatient mortality after LVAD implantation compared with men in the pulsatile-flow era (46.9% versus 31.1%, <0.0001) but not in the continuous-flow era (13.3% versus 12.1%, =0.27; for interaction=0.0002). Inpatient mortality decreased for both sexes over time after LVAD, with a sharp fall in 2008 to 2009. Female sex was independently associated with increased post-LVAD inpatient mortality beyond adjustment for demographics and risk factors during the pulsatile-flow era (odds ratio, 2.13; 95% CI, 1.45-3.10; <0.0001) but not during the continuous-flow era (1.18; 0.93-1.48; =0.16).
Although utilization of LVAD therapy increased over time for both sexes, LVAD implantation remains stably lower in women, which may suggest a potential underutilization of this potentially life-saving therapy. Prospective studies are needed to confirm these findings.
女性约占晚期心力衰竭患者的三分之一,但可能接受的晚期心力衰竭治疗(包括左心室辅助装置(LVAD))较少。在早期搏动流装置时代,女性在 LVAD 后死亡率较高,并发症增加。然而,关于连续流装置时代这些差异的知识有限。因此,我们试图探讨性别对 LVAD 应用和 LVAD 后死亡率的时间趋势。
使用全国住院患者样本确定了 2004 年至 2016 年期间接受 LVAD 植入的患者。比较了性别和装置时代 LVAD 应用和 LVAD 后住院死亡率的趋势。尽管 LVAD 越来越多地用于治疗晚期收缩性心力衰竭患者,但女性在 LVAD 接受者中的比例仍然较小,从 2004 年的 25.8%降至 2016 年的 21.9%(趋势,0.91)。在搏动流时代,女性在 LVAD 植入后住院死亡率高于男性(46.9%对 31.1%,<0.0001),但在连续流时代并非如此(13.3%对 12.1%,=0.27;交互作用=0.0002)。LVAD 后,男女住院死亡率随时间逐渐下降,2008 年至 2009 年急剧下降。在搏动流时代,除了调整人口统计学和危险因素外,女性性别与 LVAD 后住院死亡率增加独立相关(优势比,2.13;95%置信区间,1.45-3.10;<0.0001),但在连续流时代并非如此(1.18;0.93-1.48;=0.16)。
尽管 LVAD 治疗的应用在男女之间随时间推移而增加,但 LVAD 植入在女性中仍然稳定较低,这可能表明这种潜在的救命治疗方法可能未得到充分利用。需要前瞻性研究来证实这些发现。