Dataset Information

INTERMACS profiles and outcomes of ambulatory advanced heart failure patients: A report from the REVIVAL Registry.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Ambulatory patients with advanced heart failure (HF) are often considered for advanced therapies, including durable mechanical circulatory support (MCS). The Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support (INTERMACS) profiles are a commonly used descriptor of disease severity in patients receiving MCS devices, but their role in defining the prognosis of ambulatory patients is less well established, especially for Profiles 6 and 7.

Methods

Registry Evaluation of Vital Information on Ventricular Assist Devices in Ambulatory Life is a prospective observational study of 400 outpatients from 21 MCS and cardiac transplant centers. Eligible patients had New York Heart Association Class II to IV symptoms despite optimal medical and electrical therapies with a recent HF hospitalization, heart transplant listing, or evidence of high neurohormonal activation.

Results

The cohort included 33 INTERMACS Profile 4 (8%), 83 Profile 5 (21%), 155 Profile 6 (39%), and 129 Profile 7 (32%). Across INTERMACS profiles, there were no differences in age, gender, ejection fraction, blood pressure, or use of guideline-directed medical therapy. A lower INTERMACS profile was associated with more hospitalizations, greater frailty, and more impaired functional capacity and quality of life. The composite end point of death, durable MCS, or urgent transplant at 12 months occurred in 39%, 27%, 24%, and 14% subjects with INTERMACS Profiles 4, 5, 6, and 7, respectively (p?=?0.004).

Conclusions

Among ambulatory patients with advanced HF, a lower INTERMACS profile was associated with a greater burden of HF across multiple dimensions and a higher composite risk of durable MCS, urgent transplant, or death. These profiles may assist in risk assessment and triaging ambulatory patients to advanced therapies.

SUBMITTER: Kittleson MM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6942215 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

INTERMACS profiles and outcomes of ambulatory advanced heart failure patients: A report from the REVIVAL Registry.

Kittleson Michelle M MM Shah Palak P Lala Anuradha A McLean Rhondalyn C RC Pamboukian Salpy S Horstmanshof Douglas A DA Thibodeau Jennifer J Shah Keyur K Teuteberg Jeffrey J Gilotra Nisha A NA Taddei-Peters Wendy C WC Cascino Thomas M TM Richards Blair B Khalatbari Shokoufeh S Jeffries Neal N Stevenson Lynne W LW Mann Douglas D Aaronson Keith D KD Stewart Garrick C GC

The Journal of heart and lung transplantation : the official publication of the International Society for Heart Transplantation 20190828 1

<h4>Background</h4>Ambulatory patients with advanced heart failure (HF) are often considered for advanced therapies, including durable mechanical circulatory support (MCS). The Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support (INTERMACS) profiles are a commonly used descriptor of disease severity in patients receiving MCS devices, but their role in defining the prognosis of ambulatory patients is less well established, especially for Profiles 6 and 7.<h4>Methods</h4>Registry Ev ...[more]

PMID: 31522912

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPatients with heart failure (HF) often have multiple chronic conditions that may impact health-related quality of life (HRQOL) despite HF therapy. We sought to determine the association between noncardiac comorbidities and HRQOL in ambulatory patients with advanced HF.MethodsBaseline data from 373 subjects in REVIVAL (Registry Evaluation of Vital Information for Ventricular Assist Devices in Ambulatory Life) were analyzed using multivariable general linear models to evaluate the relationship between comorbidities and HRQOL (EuroQol Visual Analogue Scale, EQ-5D-3L Index Score, and Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire). The primary independent variables were a comorbidity index (sum of 14 noncardiac conditions), a residual comorbidity index (without depression), and depression alone. The median (25th to 75th percentile) number of comorbidities was 3 (2-4).ResultsIncreasing comorbidity burden was associated with a reduction in generic (EQ-5D Index, P=0.005) and HF-specific (Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire, P=0.001) HRQOL. The residual comorbidity index was not associated with HRQOL when depression included in the model independently, while depression was associated with HRQOL across all measures. Participants with depression (versus without) scored on average 13 points (95% CI, 8-17) lower on the EuroQol Visual Analogue Scale, 0.15 points (95% CI, 0.12-0.18) lower on the EQ-5D Index, and 24.9 points (95% CI, 21.2-28.5) lower on the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire overall summary score.ConclusionsWhile noncardiac comorbidities were prevalent in ambulatory advanced HF patients, only depression was associated with decreased generic and HF-specific HRQOL. Other than depression, the presence of noncardiac comorbidities should not impact expected gains in HRQOL following ventricular assist device implantation, provided the conditions are not a contraindication to implant. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01369407.

Project description:BackgroundThe Registry Evaluation of Vital Information for Ventricular Assist Devices (VADs) in Ambulatory Life study is a prospective multicenter cohort of 400 ambulatory patients with advanced chronic systolic heart failure (HF). The aim of the study is to better understand disease trajectory and optimal timing of advanced HF therapies. We examined patient health-related quality of life (HRQOL) data collected at enrollment and their association with patient treatment preferences for VAD placement.MethodsBaseline assessment of HRQOL included the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) and the EuroQol EQ-5D-3L Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), along with patient self-assessment of remaining life (PSARL). Descriptive statistics were used to present baseline HRQOL data and Spearman correlation tests to assess the association between KCCQ, VAS, and VAD treatment preference with patient clinical characteristics of interest.ResultsThe median age was 60 years, 75% were male, and the median left ventricular ejection fraction was 20%. The median (25th percentile, 75th percentile), baseline KCCQ summary score was 64 (48, 78), VAS score 65 (50, 75), and PSARL 7 years (5, 10). There were statistically significant associations of baseline KCCQ and VAS with New York Heart Association class and Interagency Registry of Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support profile (p < 0.005 for all comparisons). Baseline KCCQ and VAS revealed a modest association with PSARL (correlation?=?0.45 and 0.35, respectively; p < 0.001), and many patients were overly optimistic about their expected survival. VAD treatment preference was associated with KCCQ scores (p < 0.031), but the absolute differences were small. VAD treatment preference was independent of other key clinical characteristics such as subject age, VAS, and PSARL.ConclusionsWe found a lack of strong association between HRQOL and patient preference for VAD therapy. Better understanding of patients' perceptions of their illness and how this relates to HRQOL outcomes, clinician risk assessment, and patient decision-making is needed. This may in turn allow better guidance toward available HF therapies in this vulnerable population.

Project description:BackgroundThe outlook for ambulatory patients with advanced heart failure (HF) and the appropriate timing for left ventricular assist device (LVAD) or transplant remain uncertain. The aim of this study was to better understand disease trajectory and rates of progression to subsequent LVAD therapy and transplant in ambulatory advanced HF.MethodsPatients with advanced HF who were New York Heart Association (NYHA) Class III or IV and Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support (INTERMACS) Profiles 4 to 7, despite optimal medical therapy (without inotropic therapy), were enrolled across 11 centers and followed for the end-points of survival, transplantation, LVAD placement, and health-related quality of life. A secondary intention-to-treat survival analysis compared outcomes for MedaMACS patients with a matched group of Profile 4 to 7 patients with LVADs from the INTERMACS registry.ResultsBetween May 2013 and October 2015, 161 patients were enrolled with INTERMACS Profiles 4 (12%), 5 (32%), 6 (49%), and 7 (7%). By 2 years after enrollment, 75 (47%) patients had reached a primary end-point with 39 (24%) deaths, 17 (11%) undergoing LVAD implantation, and 19 (12%) receiving a transplant. Compared with 1,753 patients with Profiles 4 to 7 receiving LVAD therapy, there was no overall difference in intention-to-treat survival between medical and LVAD therapy, but survival with LVAD therapy was superior to medical therapy among Profile 4 and 5 patients (p = 0.0092). Baseline health-related quality of life was lower among patients receiving a LVAD than those enrolled on continuing oral medical therapy, but increased after 1 year for survivors in both cohorts.ConclusionsAmbulatory patients with advanced HF are at high risk for poor outcomes, with only 53% alive on medical therapy after 2 years of follow-up. Survival was similar for medical and LVAD therapy in the overall cohort, which included the lower severity Profiles 6 and 7, but survival was better with LVAD therapy among patients in Profiles 4 and 5. Given the poor outcomes in this group of advanced HF patients, timely consideration of transplant and LVAD is of critical importance.

Dataset Information

INTERMACS profiles and outcomes of ambulatory advanced heart failure patients: A report from the REVIVAL Registry.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

INTERMACS profiles and outcomes of ambulatory advanced heart failure patients: A report from the REVIVAL Registry.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets