<h3>Purpose</h3> The removal of the HVAD (HW) due to inferior outcomes cf. to Heartmate 3 (HM3) in adults has created a care gap for younger patients (pt). It is unclear if HW survival differs by age and if the initial experience with HM3 can bridge the gap. <h3>Methods</h3> Using the STS Intermacs/Pedimacs registry, durable implants between 09/12-08/21 where identified. Young adults (YA) were <40yrs old. Pt were excluded with an isolated RVAD or implanted as DT. Survival analysis by Kaplan Meier (KM) and Competing Outcomes Curves (COC) were performed and 1-year survival is reported. <h3>Results</h3> The Intermacs cohort consisted of 11569 pt with 1817 (15.7%) YA [HW n=817; HM3 n=372]. The median age of YA was 31.2 yrs (IQR 26.5-36.2) and wt 83Kg (IQR 68-104Kg). Most had cardiomyopathy (CM) (92.2%). The Pedimacs cohort was 660 pt [median age 9.4yrs (IQR 1.8-14.3), wt 27 Kg (IQR 10-57.2), CM (70.3%)]. Device breakdown included: HW (n=328), EXCOR (n=275) and HM3 (n=57). Fig 1 shows distribution of devices by wt. HW survival in adults differed by age, with YA fairing better (88.9% vs 79.4% at 1 yr, p<0.0001). YA survival was also better compared to Pedimacs pt (88.9 vs 83.7%, p=0.0002) but when competing events were analyzed, mortality was similar to YA (9.2% vs 9.5%, p=0.1) with a higher proportion undergoing transplant in Pedimacs (74% vs 31.2 %, p<0.0001). Survival by device did differ between HW and HM3 in YA (88.9% vs 95%, p=0.0006), but the difference was less than in older adults (79.4% vs 86.9%, p<0.001). This difference in survival was not seen in children (73.9% vs 84.8%, p=0.56), despite 31.7% of the HW implanted in pt <10 yrs compared to 14% of the HM3 (p=0.03). <h3>Conclusion</h3> The removal of the HW device may result in a care gap in younger pt whose survival outcomes do not mirror that of adults. The HM3 can fill a portion of this gap but there remains a subset of pediatric pt that based on initial HM3 use may no longer have access to intracorporeal support. However, it is likely with ongoing experience that a better understanding of the lower weight limit for HM3 will be determined.