Dataset Information

Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators in Patients With a Continuous-Flow Left Ventricular Assist Device: An Analysis of the INTERMACS Registry.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVES:This study sought to determine if the presence of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICD) provided a mortality benefit during continuous-flow left ventricular assist device (LVAD) support. BACKGROUND:An ICD decreases mortality in selected patients with advanced heart failure and have been associated with reduced mortality in patients with pulsatile LVAD. However, it is unclear whether that benefit extends to patients with a contemporary continuous-flow LVAD. METHODS:Propensity score matching was used to generate a cohort of patients with similar baseline characteristics. The primary outcome was freedom from death during LVAD support. Secondary endpoints included freedom from unexpected death, likelihood of transplantation and recovery, and adverse events. RESULTS:Among 16,384 eligible patients in the Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support registry, 2,209 patients with an ICD and 2,209 patients without one had similar propensity scores and were included. The presence of an ICD was associated with an increased mortality risk (hazard ratio: 1.20; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.04 to 1.39; p = 0.013) and an increased risk of unexpected death during device support (HR: 1.33; 95% CI: 1.03 to 1.71; p = 0.03). Patients with an ICD were more likely to undergo transplantation (HR: 1.16; 95% CI: 0.99 to 1.35; p = 0.06) and less likely to have LVAD explant for recovery (HR: 0.53, 95% CI: 0.29 to 0.98; p = 0.04). Patients with an ICD had a higher rate of treated ventricular arrhythmias (rate ratio: 1.27; 95% CI: 1.10 to 1.48; p = 0.001) and rehospitalization (rate ratio: 1.08; 95% CI: 1.04 to 1.12; p < 0.0001), but rates of hemorrhagic stroke were similar (rate ratio: 1.01; 95% CI: 0.81 to 1.26; p = 0.98). CONCLUSIONS:Among patients with a continuous flow LVAD, the presence of an ICD was not associated with reduced mortality.

SUBMITTER: Clerkin KJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5724968 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators in Patients With a Continuous-Flow Left Ventricular Assist Device: An Analysis of the INTERMACS Registry.

Clerkin Kevin J KJ Topkara Veli K VK Demmer Ryan T RT Dizon Jose M JM Yuzefpolskaya Melana M Fried Justin A JA Mai Xingchen X Mancini Donna M DM Takeda Koji K Takayama Hiroo H Naka Yoshifumi Y Colombo Paolo C PC Garan A Reshad AR

JACC. Heart failure 20171201 12

<h4>Objectives</h4>This study sought to determine if the presence of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICD) provided a mortality benefit during continuous-flow left ventricular assist device (LVAD) support.<h4>Background</h4>An ICD decreases mortality in selected patients with advanced heart failure and have been associated with reduced mortality in patients with pulsatile LVAD. However, it is unclear whether that benefit extends to patients with a contemporary continuous-flow LVAD.<h4>Me ...[more]

PMID: 29191299

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesThis study examined patient outcomes after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation across a range of center surgical volumes.BackgroundIn order for a center to qualify for reimbursement, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) requires it to implant ≥10 LVADs or total artificial hearts over a 3-year period. The impact of center LVAD surgical volumes on patient outcomes has not been thoroughly scrutinized.MethodsCenter volumes were provided for 7,416 patients undergoing LVAD implantation who were enrolled in INTERMACS (Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support). Center LVAD volume was categorized as either very low (≤10 implants/year, n = 617), low (11 to 30 implants/year, n = 2,561), medium (31 to 50 implants/year, n = 2,458), or high (>50 implants/year, n = 1,750). The main outcome of interest was patient survival based on center volume derived from Kaplan-Meier and multivariate Cox regression.ResultsOverall survival was associated with center volume (p = 0.003), as follows: 71 ± 1.8% (very low volume), 81 ± 0.8% (low volume), 83 ± 0.8% (medium volume), and 79 ± 1.0% (high volume) at 1 year. Compared with medium volume centers, the 90-day mortality was higher in very low volume (odds ratio [OR]: 1.35; p = 0.04) and high volume (OR: 1.28; p = 0.018) VAD centers. The adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for mortality were 1.32 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.11 to 1.56), 1.07 (95% CI: 0.95 to 1.21), and 1.17 (95% CI: 1.03 to 1.30) for very low, low, and high volume centers, respectively. Center volume did not predict mortality (p = 0.25; n = 3,688) in INTERMACS profile 1 patients (patients who had sustained cardiogenic shock) and profile 2 patients (patients with progressive hemodynamic decline despite inotropes).ConclusionsCenter volume correlates with post-VAD survival, with worse survival noted at very-low volume centers. These findings suggest that current U.S. VAD center standards warrant reconsideration.

Dataset Information

Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators in Patients With a Continuous-Flow Left Ventricular Assist Device: An Analysis of the INTERMACS Registry.

Publications

Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators in Patients With a Continuous-Flow Left Ventricular Assist Device: An Analysis of the INTERMACS Registry.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets