Interagency Registry For Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support Registry Research Articles

Platelet count in heart failure patients undergoing left ventricular assist device.

Left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation, a therapy for end-stage heart failure, is associated with platelet (PLT) activation. This study aims to evaluate the prognostic impact of PLT count in patients with LVAD implantation. Data from the Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support (INTERMACS) registry were investigated, and patients were divided into three groups according to tertiles. The dynamic change of PLT counts and its associations with long-term outcomes were analysed. The primary outcome was long-term mortality. A total of 19517 patients who received the first continuous-flow LVAD were identified from the INTERMACS registry. The PLT count underwent a dynamic change towards normalization after LVAD implantation. Compared with intermediate, both high (hazard ratio [HR], 1.09, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.01 to 1.17, P=0.033) and low (HR, 1.18, 95% CI: 1.10 to 1.27, P<0.001) pre-implant PLT counts were associated with an increased risk of 2year mortality. Compared with intermediate, a high post-implant PLT count was associated with an increased risk of 4year mortality (HR, 1.38, 95% CI: 1.26 to 1.52, P<0.001). Besides, both pre- and post-implant PLT counts exhibit a U-shaped association with the risk of mortality. LVAD implantation could improve the PLT count towards normalization. Abnormal pre-/post-implant PLT counts were independently associated with increased risks of long-term mortality.

The ever-changing field of mechanical circulatory support: new challenges at the advent of the 'single device era'.

The ever-changing field of mechanical circulatory support: new challenges at the advent of the 'single device era'.

Left Ventricular End-Diastolic Dimension and Clinical Outcomes After Centrifugal Flow Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation.

The impact of preoperative end-diastolic left ventricular dimension (preLVEDD) on long-term outcomes with centrifugal continuous-flow left ventricular assist device (CF-LVAD) is not well established. Accordingly, we performed an analysis of the Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support (INTERMACS) registry to study this relationship. All patients with centrifugal CF-LVAD in the INTERMACS registry from June 2006 to December 2017 were screened. The final study group consisted of 3,304 patients. After a median follow-up of 9.0 months (interquartile range [IQR], 4.2-18.8 months), 2,596 (79%) patients were alive. After adjusting for significant covariates, increased preLVEDD was associated with lower mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 0.91; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.84-0.98; p = 0.01), stroke (HR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.77-0.93; p < 0.001), and gastrointestinal bleeding (HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.80-0.97; p = 0.01), although there were more arrhythmias (HR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.05-1.24; p = 0.003). Our study suggests that preLVEDD is an independent predictor of mortality and adverse events in patients treated with centrifugal CF-LVAD. preLVEDD should be considered an important preimplant variable for risk stratification when considering a CF-LVAD.

Left Ventricular Assist Device in Patients with History of Alcohol Abuse or Substance Abuse: An INTERMACS Analysis

<h3>Purpose</h3> In order to understand the impact of history of alcohol and illicit substance abuse on outcomes after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation, we analyzed the Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support (INTERMACS) registry. <h3>Methods</h3> All patients entered into the INTERMACS registry who received a continuous-flow LVAD (CF-LVAD) from June 2006 to December 2017 were included. Patients who had a temporary LVAD, pulsatile-flow LVAD, right ventricular assist device (RVAD), total artificial hearts, or biventricular assist devices were excluded. The Median follow-up duration was 13.3 months (IQR 5.3-28.3). Multivariable Cox proportional hazards model was performed to compare survival in patients with history of alcohol or substance abuse with the rest of the population (control). <h3>Results</h3> There were a total of 15069 patients in the final study group with 1184 patients with history of alcohol abuse and 1139 patients with history of substance abuse. The mean age in alcohol abuse and substance abuse group were 53.3 ± 12.4 (years), and 47.6 ± 12.5 (years), while the mean age in control group was 57.8 ± 12.8 (years). The overall mortality rate during the follow-up in alcohol abuse and substance abuse group were 24.8%, and 21.0%, respectively, compared with 28.7% in control. There was no significant difference in adjusted mortality between the history of alcohol abuse group and control (HR, 0.97, 95% CI, 0.86-1.10, p = 0.62). Similarly, there was no difference between the history of substance abuse group and control (HR, 0.95, 95% CI, 0.83-1.10, p = 0.51) (Figure). <h3>Conclusion</h3> Our findings suggest that patients with history of alcohol abuse or substance abuse have similar mortality rates as control.

INTERMACS profiles and modifiers: Heterogeneity of patient classification and the impact of modifiers on predicting patient outcome

Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support (INTERMACS) patient profiles and modifiers are descriptors of patient illness severity before durable ventricular assist device implantation. It is unknown how individual U.S. institutions and practitioners assign profiles and if modifiers improve on risk discrimination. Respondents (n = 212) to a web-based survey answered questions about the INTERMACS profile assignment process in their institution. For 5 hypothetical clinical scenarios, respondents assigned the best profile. The INTERMACS registry (2009-2014) was queried, and hazard ratio (HR) (95% confidence interval [CI]) for mortality between profiles as well as based on the presence of temporary circulatory support (TCS), frequent flyer (FF), or arrhythmia modifiers was calculated. Respondents included 131 (62%) cardiologists, 30 (14%) surgeons, and 51 (24%) physician extenders/coordinators. Institutional INTERMACS profile assignment was variable (63% assigned by cardiologists/surgeons; 10% by research coordinators; 27% by physician extenders). Profile assignments in hypothetical patient scenarios were heterogeneous, especially for contiguous profiles. The 1-year survivals for Profiles 1, 2, and 3 were 77 ± 1.2%, 80 ± 0.7%, and 84 ± 0.7% (p < 0.001). Although Profile 1 patients had worse adjusted survival than Profile 3 patients (p = 0.001), survival for Profile 1 patients vs Profile 2 patients was similar (adjusted HR = 1.01 [95% CI = 0.88-1.12]). The TCS (adjusted HR = 1.1 [95% CI = 0.94-1.2]) and arrhythmia (adjusted HR = 1.1 [95% CI = 0.97-1.2]) modifiers were not predictive of mortality, but the FF modifier was (HR = 1.3 [95% CI = 1.02-1.63]). Substantial heterogeneity exists in the process and assignment of INTERMACS profiles. This heterogeneity could affect mortality estimates used for risk stratification. Only the FF modifier appears to improve risk discrimination beyond that of known risk factors. Adding objective descriptors may reduce profile heterogeneity.

Outcomes of Patients Implanted With a Left Ventricular Assist Device at Nontransplant Mechanical Circulatory Support Centers

The goal of this study was to assess outcomes of patients who underwent implantation of left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) at nontransplantation mechanical circulatory support centers. As the availability of LVADs for advanced heart failure has expanded to nontransplantation mechanical circulatory support centers, concerns have been expressed about maintaining good outcomes. Demographics and outcomes were evaluated in 276 patients with advanced heart failure who underwent implantation of LVADs as bridge to transplantation or destination therapy at 27 open-heart centers. Baseline characteristics, operative mortality, length of stay, readmission rate, adverse events, quality of life, and survival were analyzed. The overall 30-day mortality was 3% (8 of 276), and survival rates at 6, 12, and 24 months, respectively, were 92±2%, 88±3%, and 84±4% for the bridge-to-transplantation group and 81±3%, 70±5%, and 63±6% for the destination therapy group, comparable with results published by the national Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support (INTERMACS). The median length of stay for all patients was 21 days. Bleeding was the most frequent adverse event. Stroke occurred in 4% (bridge to transplantation) and 6% (destination therapy) of patients. Quality-of-life measures and 6-minute walk distances showed sustained improvements throughout support. In conclusion, outcomes with LVAD support at open-heart centers are acceptable and comparable with results from the INTERMACS registry. With appropriate teams, training, center commitment, and certification, LVAD therapy is being disseminated in a responsible way to open-heart centers.

Left ventricular assist device for end-stage heart failure: results of the first LVAD destination program in the Netherlands : Towards LVAD destination therapy in the Netherlands?

Left ventricular assist device for end-stage heart failure: results of the first LVAD destination program in the Netherlands : Towards LVAD destination therapy in the Netherlands?

Results of the Destination Therapy Post-Food and Drug Administration Approval Study With a Continuous Flow Left Ventricular Assist Device: A Prospective Study Using the INTERMACS Registry (Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support)

A post-approval (PA) study for destination therapy (DT) was required by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to determine whether results with the HeartMate (HM) II (Thoratec, Pleasanton, California) left ventricular assist device (LVAD) in a commercial setting were comparable to results during the DT multicenter pivotal clinical trial. New device technology developed in the clinical research setting requires validation in a real-world setting. The PA study was a prospective evaluation of the first 247 HM II patients identified pre-operatively as eligible for DT in the national INTERMACS (Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support) registry. Patients were enrolled from January to September 2010 at 61 U.S. centers and followed for 2 years. A historical comparison group included patients (n = 133 at 34 centers) enrolled in the primary data cohort in the DT pivotal trial (TR). Survival rates and adverse events for the PA group were obtained from the INTERMACS registry. Baseline characteristics were similar for PA versus TR. Forty-five percent of PA patients were in INTERMACS profiles 1 to 2 and 28% were in profile 3. Adverse events in the PA group were similar or lower than those in the TR group, including improvements in device-related infection (0.22 vs. 0.47) and post-operative bleeding requiring surgery (0.09 vs. 0.23) events per patient-year. Kaplan-Meier survival at 2 years was 62% (PA group) versus 58% (TR group). PA group survival at 1 and 2 years was 82 ± 5% and 69 ± 6% for INTERMACS profiles 4 to 7 (n = 63) versus 72 ± 3% and 60 ± 4% for profiles 1 to 3 (n = 184). The median length of stay after surgery was reduced by 6 days in the PA group versus the TR group. Results in a commercial patient care setting for the DT population supported the original pivotal clinical trial findings regarding the efficacy and risk profile of the HM II LVAD. Survival was best in patients who were not inotrope-dependent (INTERMACS profiles 4 to 7).

Increased Need for Right Ventricular Support in Patients With Chemotherapy-Induced Cardiomyopathy Undergoing Mechanical Circulatory Support: Outcomes From the INTERMACS Registry (Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support)

The aim of this study was to investigate the use of durable mechanical circulatory support (MCS) in patients with chemotherapy-induced cardiomyopathy (CCMP) and determine their outcomes and survival in comparison to that of other patients with end-stage heart failure treated similarly. Patients with end-stage heart failure as a result of CCMP from anthracyclines are often precluded from heart transplantation because of a history of cancer. In such patients, durable MCS may offer an important chance for life prolongation. Yet, there are no data to support the use of MCS in this increasingly prevalent group of patients. We searched 3,812 MCS patients from June 2006 through March 2011 in the INTERMACS (Interagency Registry forMechanically Assisted Circulatory Support) database for the diagnosis of CCMP. We compared characteristics, outcomes, and survival between CCMP patients and patients with nonischemic cardiomyopathy and ischemic cardiomyopathy. Compared with patients with nonischemic cardiomyopathy and ischemic cardiomyopathy, patients with CCMP were overwhelmingly female (72% vs. 24% vs. 13%, p= 0.001), had MCS more often implanted as destination therapy (33%vs. 14% vs. 22%, p= 0.03), required more right ventricular assist device support (19% vs. 11% vs. 6%, p= 0.006), and had a higher risk of bleeding (p= 0001). Survival of CCMP patients was similar to that of other groups. CCMP patients treated with MCS have survival similar to other MCS patients despite more frequent need for right ventricular assist device support and increased bleeding risk.

Mechanisms of Bleeding and Approach to Patients With Axial-Flow Left Ventricular Assist Devices

Axial-flow LVADs have become an integral tool in the management of end-stage heart failure. Consequently, nonsurgical bleeding has emerged as a major source of morbidity and mortality in this fragile population. The mechanisms responsible for these adverse events include acquired von Willebrand disease, GI tract angiodysplasia formation, impaired platelet aggregation, and overuse of anticoagulation therapy. Because of ongoing concerns for pump thrombosis and thromboembolic events, the thrombotic/bleeding paradigm has led to a difficult clinical dilemma for those managing patients treated with axial flow LVADs. As the field progresses, advances in the understanding of the pathological mechanisms underlying bleeding/thrombosis risk, careful risk stratification, and potential use of novel anticoagulants will all play a role in the management of the LVAD patient.

Results of the Post-U.S. Food and Drug Administration-Approval Study With a Continuous Flow Left Ventricular Assist Device as a Bridge to Heart Transplantation: A Prospective Study Using the INTERMACS (Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support)

The aim of this study was to determine whether results with the HeartMate (HM) II left ventricular assist device (LVAD) (Thoratec Corporation, Pleasanton, California) in a commercial setting are comparable to other available devices for the same indication. After a multicenter pivotal clinical trial conducted from 2005 to 2008, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved the HM II LVAD for bridge to transplantation (BTT). A post-approval study was required by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to determine whether results with the device in a commercial setting are comparable to other available devices for the same indication. The study was a prospective evaluation of the first 169 consecutive HM II patients enrolled in the national INTERMACS (Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support) who were listed for transplant or likely to be listed. Patients were enrolled from April through August 2008 at 77 U.S. centers and followed for at least 1 year after implant. A comparison group (COMP) included all patients (n = 169 at 27 centers) enrolled in the INTERMACS registry with other types of LVADs (79% HeartMate XVE, 21% Implantable Ventricular Assist Device [Thoratec Corporation]) for the same BTT indication in the same time period. Survival rates, adverse events, and quality of life with the EuroQol EQ-5D visual analog scale were obtained in the INTERMACS registry. Baseline characteristics were similar, but creatinine and blood urea nitrogen were lower in the HM II versus COMP groups, and there were fewer patients in the highest-risk INTERMACS patient profile Number 1 (24% for HM II vs. 39% for COMP). Adverse event rates were similar or lower for HM II versus COMP for all events. Bleeding was the most frequent adverse event for both groups (1.44 vs. 1.79 events/patient-year). Operative 30-day mortality for HM II was 4% versus 11% for COMP. The percentage of patients reaching transplant, cardiac recovery, or ongoing LVAD support by 6 months was 91% for HM II and 80% for COMP, and the Kaplan-Meier survival for patients remaining on support at 1 year was 85% for HM II versus 70% for COMP. Quality of life was significantly improved at 3 months of support and sustained through 12 months in both groups compared with baseline. The results in a post-market approval, actual patient care setting BTT population support the original findings from the pivotal clinical trial regarding the efficacy and risk profile of the HM II LVAD. These data suggest that dissemination of this technology after approval has been associated with continued excellent results.