Outcomes for Children With Congenital Heart Disease Undergoing Ventricular Assist Device Implantation: An ACTION Registry Analysis.

BACKGROUND

There are no contemporary reports that highlight the national outcomes for children with congenital heart disease (CHD) undergoing ventricular assist device (VAD) implantation.

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to evaluate differences in VAD outcomes for children with CHD to those with non-CHD as well as those with univentricular CHD to those with biventricular CHD.

METHODS

Data for CHD and non-CHD patients from the multicenter ACTION (Advanced Cardiac Therapies Improving Outcomes Network) undergoing VAD implantation from April 2018 to February 2023 were included. Preimplantation characteristics were compared between CHD and non-CHD as well as univentricular and biventricular CHD patients. Postimplantation survival and adverse events were compared between these cohorts.

RESULTS

Of 966 patients undergoing VAD implantation, 352 (36%) had CHD, the majority of whom had univentricular CHD (230; 65%). Compared to non-CHD, CHD patients were younger (median age: 1.2 vs 9.4 years), were listed as INTERMACS (Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support) 1 (36.1% vs 28.7%), were on mechanical ventilation (67.0% vs 44.1%), received total parenteral nutrition (63.6% vs 45.1%), and were on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) preimplantation (33.2% vs 20.5%) (P < 0.05 for all). Except for lower estimated glomerular filtration rate in children with univentricular CHD (median: 47.3 vs 59.9 mL/min/1.73 m), there were no significant differences in clinical characteristics in univentricular vs biventricular CHD patients. Children with CHD compared to non-CHD were more likely to experience major adverse events (stroke, bleeding, infection, respiratory failure, renal and hepatic dysfunction) and have worse adjusted survival (HR: 2.05; 95% CI: 1.39-3.02; P < 0.001). There were no differences in adjusted survival in univentricular vs biventricular CHD (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

CHD patients are more likely in extremis at VAD implantation and experience higher rates of adverse events and worse survival compared to those with non-CHD. Timely referral for patients with CHD experiencing worsening heart failure and a proactive approach to VAD implantation has the potential to improve outcomes for this vulnerable cohort.