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
. 2017 Apr 1;119(7):1069-1073.
doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2016.12.014. Epub 2017 Jan 5.

Global Outcome in Patients With Left Ventricular Assist Devices

Affiliations

Global Outcome in Patients With Left Ventricular Assist Devices

Timothy J Fendler et al. Am J Cardiol. .

Abstract

Left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) improve survival and quality of life (QOL) for most, but not all, patients with advanced heart failure. We described a broader definition of poor outcomes after LVAD, using a novel composite of death, QOL, and other major adverse events. We evaluated the frequency of poor global outcome at 1 year after LVAD among 164 patients (86% Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support profile 1 to 2; shock or declining despite inotropes) at a high-volume center. Poor global outcome (comprising death, poor QOL [Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire <45], recurrent heart failure [≥2 heart failure readmissions], or severe stroke) occurred in 58 patients (35%): 37 died, 17 had poor QOL, 3 had recurrent heart failure, and 1 had a severe stroke. Patients with poor global outcomes were more likely designated for destination therapy (46% vs 24%, p = 0.01), spent more days hospitalized per month alive (median [interquartile range] 18.6 [5.0 to 31.0] vs 3.7 [1.8 to 8.3], p <0.001), and had higher intracranial (12% vs 2%, p = 0.031) and gastrointestinal (44% vs 28%, p = 0.056) hemorrhage rates over the year after implant. Although LVADs often improve survival and QOL, ∼1/3 of high-acuity patients experienced a poor global outcome over the year after LVAD. In conclusion, composite outcomes may better capture events that matter to patients with LVADs and thus support informed decisions about pursuing LVAD therapy.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1. Frequency and Causes of Poor Global Outcome in Patients with LVADs
1Of those who died, prior to death: 6 had severe strokes, 1 had poor quality of life, and 1 had recurrent heart failure.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Flint KM, Matlock DD, Lindenfeld J, Allen LA. Frailty and the selection of patients for destination therapy left ventricular assist device. Circ Heart Fail. 2012;5:286–293. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Cowger J, Sundareswaran K, Rogers JG, Park SJ, Pagani FD, Bhat G, Jaski B, Farrar DJ, Slaughter MS. Predicting survival in patients receiving continuous flow left ventricular assist devices: the HeartMate II risk score. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;61:313–321. - PubMed
    1. Ketchum ES, Moorman AJ, Fishbein DP, Mokadam NA, Verrier ED, Aldea GS, Andrus S, Kenyon KW, Levy WC. Predictive value of the Seattle Heart Failure Model in patients undergoing left ventricular assist device placement. J Heart Lung Transplant. 2010;29:1021–1025. - PubMed
    1. Matthews JC, Pagani FD, Haft JW, Koelling TM, Naftel DC, Aaronson KD. Model for end-stage liver disease score predicts left ventricular assist device operative transfusion requirements, morbidity, and mortality. Circulation. 2010;121:214–220. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Lewis EF, Johnson PA, Johnson W, Collins C, Griffin L, Stevenson LW. Preferences for quality of life or survival expressed by patients with heart failure. J Heart Lung Transplant. 2001;20:1016–1024. - PubMed

Publication types