Impact of age on outcomes following continuous-flow left ventricular assist device implantation
Open Access
- 13 March 2015
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Oxford University Press (OUP) in Interactive CardioVascular and Thoracic Surgery
- Vol. 20 (6), 743-748
- https://doi.org/10.1093/icvts/ivv051
Abstract
The goal of our study was to analyse the impact of age on outcomes in patients who underwent continuous-flow left ventricular assist device (CF-LVAD) placement at our institution. One hundred and twenty-eight patients were implanted with a CF-LVAD between January 2008 and June 2014. Eighty-five patients were implanted with the device as a bridge to transplant (BTT); the remaining (n = 43) were on destination therapy (DT). Each group was divided into patients n = 8) had a lower preoperative cardiac index and prothrombin time–international normalized ratio (P = 0.009), and a longer stay in the intensive care unit (P = 0.008). Adverse events including infections, re-exploration for bleeding, ischaemic and haemorrhagic stroke, renal failure and right heart failure were comparable in both age groups. Eighty-two percent (n = 63) of the young patients and 75% (n = 6) of the older patients, who were on LVAD as BTT, underwent heart transplant within the first 24 months of LVAD implantation. Overall survival at 3, 6, 12 and 24 months were 95, 95, 77 and 70%, respectively, post-CF-LVAD implantation as BTT for the younger group and 73% for the older group at 3, 6 and 12 months (P = 0.35). Forty-three patients (34%) received a CF-LVAD as DT. Patients ≥65 years old (n = 14) on DT had a higher incidence of peripheral vascular disease (P = 0.048), higher serum sodium (P = 0.004) and serum creatinine values (P = 0.002), preoperatively. There were more strokes in the older patients post-LAVD implantation (14 vs 0%; P = 0.048). Overall survival at 3, 6, 12 and 24 months were 85, 79, 75 and 62%, respectively, for the younger group and 93, 77, 67 and 34% for the older group, respectively (P = 0.26). This study demonstrates that LVAD therapy can be used in the older patients with acceptable mortality and morbidity, and age alone should not be used as the sole criterion for exclusion from LVAD implantation.Keywords
This publication has 12 references indexed in Scilit:
- Outcomes after implantation of 139 full-support continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices as a bridge to transplantationEuropean Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery, 2014
- Sixth INTERMACS annual report: A 10,000-patient databaseThe Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation, 2014
- Comparative cost-effectiveness of the HeartWare versus HeartMate II left ventricular assist devices used in the United Kingdom National Health Service bridge-to-transplant program for patients with heart failureThe Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation, 2014
- State of the Art of Mechanical Circulatory SupportTexas Heart Institute Journal, 2014
- Outcomes and Predictors of Early Mortality After Continuous-Flow Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation as a Bridge to TransplantationAsaio Journal, 2014
- Clinical Differences Between Continuous Flow Ventricular Assist Devices: A Comparison Between HeartMate II and HeartWare HVADJournal of Cardiac Surgery, 2013
- Age and Outcome After Continuous-Flow Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation as Bridge to TransplantationThe Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation, 2009
- Multidisciplinary approach decreases length of stay and reduces cost for ventricular assist device therapyInteractive CardioVascular and Thoracic Surgery, 2008
- Outcomes in Patients Older Than 60 Years of Age Undergoing Orthotopic Heart Transplantation: An Analysis of the UNOS DatabaseThe Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation, 2008
- Effect of Age on Outcomes After Left Ventricular Assist Device PlacementTransplantation Proceedings, 2006