Frailty of the Heart Recipient

International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation Guidelines for the Evaluation and Care of Cardiac Transplant Candidates-2024

The "International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation Guidelines for the Evaluation and Care of Cardiac Transplant Candidates-2024" updates and replaces the "Listing Criteria for Heart Transplantation: International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation Guidelines for the Care of Cardiac Transplant Candidates-2006" and the "2016 International Society for Heart Lung Transplantation Listing Criteria for Heart Transplantation: A 10-year Update." The document aims to provide tools to help integrate the numerous variables involved in evaluating patients for transplantation, emphasizing updating the collaborative treatment while waiting for a transplant. There have been significant practice-changing developments in the care of heart transplant recipients since the publication of the International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation (ISHLT) guidelines in 2006 and the 10-year update in 2016. The changes pertain to 3 aspects of heart transplantation: (1) patient selection criteria, (2) care of selected patient populations, and (3) durable mechanical support. To address these issues, 3 task forces were assembled. Each task force was cochaired by a pediatric heart transplant physician with the specific mandate to highlight issues unique to the pediatric heart transplant population and ensure their adequate representation. This guideline was harmonized with other ISHLT guidelines published through November 2023. The 2024 ISHLT guidelines for the evaluation and care of cardiac transplant candidates provide recommendations based on contemporary scientific evidence and patient management flow diagrams. The American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association modular knowledge chunk format has been implemented, allowing guideline information to be grouped into discrete packages (or modules) of information on a disease-specific topic or management issue. Aiming to improve the quality of care for heart transplant candidates, the recommendations present an evidence-based approach.

The Impact of Frailty Components and Preoperative Mechanical Cardiac Support Changes with Time after Heart Transplantation

BACKGROUND

Frailty has been proven to be associated with mortality after orthotopic heart transplantation (OHT). The aim of our study was to determine the impact of frailty on mortality in the current era using pretransplant mechanical cardiac support (MCS).

METHODS

We retrospectively calculated the frailty scores of 471 patients undergoing OHT in a single institution between January 2012 and August 2022. The outcome was all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

The median survival time was 1987 days (IQR: 1487 days) for all patients. In total, 266 (56.5%) patients were categorized as nonfrail, 179 (38.0%) as prefrail, and 26 (5.5%) as frail. The survival rates were 0.73, 0.54, and 0.28 for nonfrail, prefrail, and frail patients, respectively. The frailty score was associated with mortality [HR: 1.34 (95% CI: 1.22-1.47, p < 0.001)]. Among the components of the frailty score, age above 50 years, creatinine ≥ 3.0 mg/dL or prior dialysis, and hospitalization before OHT were independently associated with mortality. Continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices (CF-LVAD) were associated with an increased risk for all-cause mortality [AHR: 1.80 (95% CI: 1.01-3.24, p = 0.047)].

CONCLUSIONS

The components of the frailty score were not equally associated with mortality. Frailty and pretransplant MCS should be included in the risk estimation.

Impairments identified by comprehensive geriatric assessment in potential candidates for left ventricular assist device and heart transplantation

Background

The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence of frailty and other impairments in potential left ventricular assist device (LVAD) and heart transplantation (HTx) candidates by performing a preoperative comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) and reviewing the treatment recommendations resulting from the CGA.

Methods and results

This cross-sectional study included 73 patients aged ≥40 years who received a CGA as part of the patient selection procedure for LVAD and HTx. In every patient, a conclusion comprising frailty and other impairments was formulated based on the medical, mental, functional, and social domains and recommendations were made. The mean age was 58 years (range 40-71) and 70 % were male. In 97 % of patients, at least one impairment was identified by the CGA. The most common impairments were polypharmacy, high morbidity burden, reduced renal function, osteopenia, depression, poor quality of life, reduced functionality, (risk of) malnutrition, reduced grip strength and high caregiver burden. A small proportion of the potential LVAD and HTx candidates were frail (7 % according to Fried's frailty criteria, 6 % according to the Edmonton Frail Scale) and 39 % were pre-frail. The domains for which most impairments were found and the domains for which most treatment recommendations were given matched well, with the functional domain as the frontrunner.

Conclusion

This study showed that most of the potential candidates for LVAD or HTx have impairments on at least one domain of the CGA. Impairments and associated risks can contribute to the decision making process for candidacy for LVAD and HTx.

Frailty in the Advanced Heart Failure Patient: A Challenging, Neglected, Yet Potentially Modifiable Risk Factor

Purpose of review

There is an increasing push for frailty assessment to become a routine part of the evaluation of potential candidates for advanced heart failure (AHF) therapies. The aim of this review is to highlight the importance of frailty in the care of the AHF patient.

Recent findings

This review focuses on some of the available data for the assessment of frailty specifically in the AHF, durable mechanical circulatory support (MCS), and heart transplant (HT) patients, and explores some of the challenges in assessing frailty in these patient populations.

Summary

As the presence of frailty can significantly impact outcomes after HT and durable MCS implantation, there should be an increased recognition of this entity during routine evaluation and management of the AHF patient.

Old Age and Frailty in Deceased Organ Transplantation and Allocation-A Plea for Geriatric Assessment and Prehabilitation

Due to demographic ageing and medical progress, the number and proportion of older organ donors and recipients is increasing. At the same time, the medical and ethical significance of ageing and old age for organ transplantation needs clarification. Advanced age is associated with the frailty syndrome that has a negative impact on the success of organ transplantation. However, there is emerging evidence that frailty can be modified by suitable prehabilitation measures. Against this backdrop, we argue that decision making about access to the transplant waiting list and the allocation of donor organs should integrate geriatric expertise in order to assess and manage frailty and impairments in functional capacity. Prehabilitation should be implemented as a new strategy for pre-operative conditioning of older risk patients' functional capacity. From an ethical point of view, advanced chronological age per se should not preclude the indication for organ transplantation and the allocation of donor organs.

Multimodal Prehabilitation in Heart Transplant Recipients Improves Short-Term Post-Transplant Outcomes without Increasing Costs

(1) Background and aim: This study aimed to investigate the impact of prehabilitation on the postoperative outcomes of heart transplantation and its cost-effectiveness. (2) Methods: This single-center, ambispective cohort study included forty-six candidates for elective heart transplantation from 2017 to 2021 attending a multimodal prehabilitation program consisting of supervised exercise training, physical activity promotion, nutritional optimization, and psychological support. The postoperative course was compared to a control cohort consisting of patients transplanted from 2014 to 2017 and those contemporaneously not involved in prehabilitation. (3) Results: A significant improvement was observed in preoperative functional capacity (endurance time 281 vs. 728 s, p < 0.001) and quality-of-life (Minnesota score 58 vs. 47, p = 0.046) after the program. No exercise-related events were registered. The prehabilitation cohort showed a lower rate and severity of postoperative complications (comprehensive complication index 37 vs. 31, p = 0.033), lower mechanical ventilation time (37 vs. 20 h, p = 0.032), ICU stay (7 vs. 5 days, p = 0.01), total hospitalization stay (23 vs. 18 days, p = 0.008) and less need for transfer to nursing/rehabilitation facilities after hospital discharge (31% vs. 3%, p = 0.009). A cost-consequence analysis showed that prehabilitation did not increase the total surgical process costs. (4) Conclusions: Multimodal prehabilitation before heart transplantation has benefits on short-term postoperative outcomes potentially attributable to enhancement of physical status, without cost-increasing.

The role of frailty in advanced HF and cardiac transplantation

Frailty is a complex, multi-system condition often associated with multimorbidity. It has become an important prognostic maker across a range of conditions and is particularly relevant in patients with cardiovascular disease. Frailty encompasses a range of domains including, physical, psychological, and social. There are currently a range of validated tools available to measure frailty. It is an especially important measurement in advanced HF, because frailty occurs in up to 50% of HF patients and is potentially reversible with therapies such as mechanical circulatory support and transplantation. Moreover, frailty is dynamic, and therefore serial measurements are important. This review delves into the measurement of frailty, mechanisms, and its role in different cardiovascular cohorts. Understanding frailty will help determine patients that will benefit from therapies, as well as prognosticate outcomes.

Patient selection for heart transplant: balancing risk

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Heart failure incidence continues to rise despite a relatively static number of available donor hearts. Selecting an appropriate heart transplant candidate requires evaluation of numerous factors to balance patient benefit while maximizing the utility of scarce donor hearts. Recent research has provided new insights into refining recipient risk assessment, providing additional tools to further define and balance risk when considering heart transplantation.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent publications have developed models to assist in risk stratifying potential heart transplant recipients based on cardiac and noncardiac factors. These studies provide additional tools to assist clinicians in balancing individual risk and benefit of heart transplantation in the context of a limited donor organ supply.

SUMMARY

The primary goal of heart transplantation is to improve survival and maximize quality of life. To meet this goal, a careful assessment of patient-specific risks is essential. The optimal approach to patient selection relies on integrating recent prognostication models with a multifactorial assessment of established clinical characteristics, comorbidities and psychosocial factors.