Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Case Reports
. 2010 Sep;85(9):791-7.
doi: 10.4065/mcp.2010.0113. Epub 2010 Jun 28.

Ethical analysis of withdrawing ventricular assist device support

Paul S Mueller  1 , Keith M Swetz, Monica R Freeman, Kari A Carter, Mary Eliot Crowley, Cathy J Anderson Severson, Soon J Park, Daniel P Sulmasy
Affiliations
Case Reports

Ethical analysis of withdrawing ventricular assist device support

Paul S Mueller et al. Mayo Clin Proc. 2010 Sep.

Abstract

Objective: To describe a series of patients with heart failure supported with a ventricular assist device (VAD) who requested (or whose surrogates requested) withdrawal of VAD support and the legal and ethical aspects pertaining to these requests.

Patients and methods: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of patients at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, from March 1, 2003, through January 31, 2009, who requested (or whose surrogates requested) withdrawal of VAD support and for whom the requests were fulfilled. We then explored the legal and ethical permissibility of carrying out such requests.

Results: The median age of the 14 patients identified (13 men, 1 woman) was 57 years. Requests were made by 2 patients and 12 surrogates. None of the patients' available advance directives mentioned the VAD. For 11 patients, multidisciplinary care conferences were held before withdrawal of VAD support. Only 1 patient had an ethics consultation. All 14 patients died within 1 day of withdrawal of VAD support.

Conclusion: Patients have the right to refuse or request the withdrawal of any unwanted treatment, and we argue that this right extends to VAD support. We also argue that the cause of death in these cases is the underlying heart disease, not assisted suicide or euthanasia. Therefore, patients with heart failure supported with VADs or their surrogates may request withdrawal of this treatment. In our view, carrying out such requests is permissible in accordance with the principles that apply to withdrawing other life-sustaining treatments.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. American Heart Association (AMA) 2000 Heart and Stroke Statistical Update. Dallas, TX: Association Heart Association; 2000.
    1. Ferris H, Hunt S. Destination ventricular assist devices for heart failure #205. J Palliat Med. 2009;12(10):956-957 - PubMed
    1. Rose EA, Gelijns AC, Moskowitz AJ, et al. Randomized Evaluation of Mechanical Assistance for the Treatment of Congestive Heart Failure (REMATCH) Study Group Long-term mechanical left ventricular assistance for end-stage heart failure. N Engl J Med. 2001;345(20):1435-1443 - PubMed
    1. Slaughter MS, Rogers JG, Milano CA, et al. HeartMate II Investigators Advanced heart failure treated with continuous-flow left ventricular assist device. N Engl J Med. 2009;361(23):2241-2251 - PubMed
    1. Boilson BA, Schirger JA, Durham LA, III, et al. Transformation of LVAD destination therapy, “good to great”: ever increasing survival benefit [abstract 3662]. Circulation. 2009;120:S844

Publication types