P5419Cardiac reverse remodeling and recovery in dilated cardiomyopathy medication-naive patients requiring durable left ventricular assist device support

Background

Occasionally new onset cardiomyopathy patients (pts) present late and with such advanced disease stage that they cannot tolerate heart failure (HF) drug therapy. We sought to investigate the cardiac recovery (CR) potential following a combination of left ventricular assist device (LVAD) and guideline-directed HF drug therapy in this medication-naive population.

Methods

Chronic advanced HF requiring durable continuous-flow LVAD were prospectively evaluated. Patients with acute HF (myocarditis etc.) or post LVAD follow up <3 months were excluded. The “meds-treated” group (n=203) comprised patients treated adequately with at least one neurohormonal blocking agent during their HF history (b-blocker, ACEI/ARB, Aldosterone antagonist) and “meds-naive” group (n=8) comprised patients who were never before treated adequately with any HF medication. Baseline and follow up clinical, hemodynamic, imaging and laboratory data were analyzed. LVAD patients were phenotyped as CR responders or non responders, based on published predefined criteria.

Results

Univariate analysis showed that “med-naive” patients were younger, more likely to be on intravenous vasoactive agents, temporary mechanical support and with lower INTERMACS profile before LVAD implantation. Interestingly, no differences were seen in HF symptoms duration or other comorbidities. Baseline and follow up hemodynamics were similar in both groups, besides higher right atrial pressure pre-LVAD in the “meds-naive” group (16 vs 11 mmHg; p=0.04). Baseline echocardiographic (including LV dilation) and biochemical parameters revealed no differences between the groups, besides lower LVEF and higher BNP in the “meds-naive” group (14 vs 19%; p=0.03 and 2352 vs 1270; p=0.03, respectively). CR rates were significantly higher on “meds-naive” versus “meds-failed” group (50.0 vs 13.8%; p=0.005). Despite higher cardiac recovery rates in the “meds-naive” group the time course and magnitude of the favorable functional and structural response was similar among the CR responders of each of the 2 groups.

Conclusion

Young patients with new onset dilated cardiomyopathy sometimes present late, with advanced disease stage, unable to tolerate HF medications and requiring durable LVAD support. This patient population appears to have a potential for CR up to 50% and this could be factored in decisions surrounding their long-term therapeutic options.

P2628Predicting cardiac recovery before durable left ventricular assist device implantation in advanced heart failure patients

Background

Predicting cardiac recovery (CR) in advanced heart failure (HF) patients before left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation remains challenging. This study sought to investigate whether CR after LVAD unloading can be predicted by cardiac functional and structural parameters together with clinical characteristics.

Methods

From 2008 to 2016, consecutive advanced chronic HF patients (N=347) supported with durable continuous-flow LVADs were prospectively evaluated. Patients with acute HF etiologies or without adequate post-LVAD follow up (<3 months) were excluded. A great variety of clinical characteristics were evaluated in the remaining 285 subjects. LVAD patients were phenotyped while on support, as CR Responders or Non Responders, based on published predefined echocardiographic criteria. Multivariable logistic regression was used to form the model and the Utah Cardiac Recovery (UCAR) score was created from the regression beta coefficients of the final model.

Results

CR occurred in 13.7% of patients. Univariate analysis showed that responders were more likely to be young, female, non-ischemic cardiomyopathy, with shorter HF symptoms duration and no prior cardiac surgery. They had lower blood urea nitrogen and were more likely to be on temporary mechanical support before LVAD. The multivariable UCAR model (AUC=0.755; p<0.001) predicted CR using 3 clinical parameters – Figure.

Conclusion

Univariate and multivariable predictors of CR include both modifiable and non-modifiable patient characteristics that are known prior to LVAD implantation. The UCAR score can serve as a practical tool for targeted patient selection to implement protocols that facilitate CR in the advanced HF patient subpopulation that is most likely to respond.

Ventricular assist devices: pharmacological aspects of a mechanical therapy

Heart failure (HF) is a global epidemic that continues to cause significant morbidity and mortality despite advances in medical therapy. Ventricular assist device technology has emerged as a therapeutic option to bridge patients with end-stage HF to heart transplantation or as an alternative to transplantation in selected patients. In some patients, mechanical unloading induced by ventricular assist devices leads to improvement of myocardial function and a possibility of device removal. The implementation of this advanced technology requires multiple pharmacological interventions, both in the perioperative and long-term periods, in order to minimize potential complications and improve patient outcomes. We herein review the latest available evidence supporting the use of specific pharmacological interventions and current practices in the care of these patients: anticoagulation, bleeding management, pump thrombosis, infections, arrhythmias, right ventricular failure, hypertension, desensitization protocols, among others. Areas of uncertainty and ground for future research are also highlighted.

Impact of donor left ventricular hypertrophy on survival after heart transplant

Left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) of the donor heart is believed to increase the risk of allograft failure after transplant. However this effect is not well quantified, with variable findings from single-center studies. The United Network for Organ Sharing database was used to analyze the effect of donor LVH on recipient survival. Three cohorts, selected in accordance with the American Society of Echocardiography guidelines, were examined: recipients of allografts without LVH (<1.1 cm), with mild LVH (1.1-1.3 cm) and with moderate-severe LVH (≥ 1.4 cm). The study group included 2626 patients with follow-up of up to 3.3 years. Mild LVH was present in 38% and moderate-severe LVH in 5.6% of allografts. Predictors of mortality included a number of donor and recipient characteristics, but not LVH. However, a subgroup analysis showed an increased risk of death in recipients of allografts with LVH and donor age >55 years, and in recipients of allografts with LVH and ischemic time ≥ 4 h. In the contemporary era, close to half of all transplanted allografts demonstrate LVH, and survival of these recipients is similar to those without LVH. However, the use of allografts with LVH in association with other high-risk characteristics may result in increased mortality.

Impact of donor cause of death on transplant outcomes: UNOS registry analysis

Donor cause of death (DCOD) has been described to influence allograft survival. Whether this effect is independent of other donor characteristics and whether it is similar across different solid organ allografts is not known. The aim of our study was to determine the impact of DCOD on organ utilization and on transplantation outcomes-graft rejection, function, and survival. The registry data were provided by the United Network for Organ Sharing/Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network. Stroke, head trauma, and anoxia were the cause of brain death in 97% of the more than 86,000 donors whose data were recorded between 1989 and 2008. In univariate analysis, stroke DCOD was associated with worse graft survival across all organs. After adjustment in a multivariable analysis, modest differences persisted in survival of heart, kidney, and liver allografts. DCOD also appeared to affect the incidence of allograft rejection. Anoxia DCOD was associated with significantly less rejection relative to donor death caused by head trauma and stroke. In summary, this multi-institutional study confirms that DCOD is a modest predictor of survival and rejection of solid organ allografts of different types.