Outcomes of bridge to cardiac retransplantation in the contemporary mechanical circulatory support era

Joseph E. Sanchez, Hiroo Takayama, Masahiko Ando, Jiho Han, Paul Kurlansky, Arthur R. Garan, Veli K. Topkara, Maryjane Farr, Paolo C. Colombo, Yoshifumi Naka, Koji Takeda

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

5 Scopus citations

Abstract

Background: Outcomes have improved in patients bridged to heart transplant on contemporary continuous-flow ventricular assist devices over the past decade. We evaluated mechanical circulatory support as a means to bridge patients to cardiac retransplantation. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 464 patients who underwent cardiac retransplant from the United Network for Organ Sharing database between January 2006 and November 2016. Pre- and post-transplant data were compared between patients bridged to retransplant with mechanical circulatory support (n = 81) and those without mechanical circulatory support (n = 383). Results: The mean ages for the patients in the mechanical circulatory support and nonmechanical circulatory support cohorts were 41.2 ± 16 years and 42.1 ± 15.7 years, respectively (P = .64). Patients bridged with mechanical circulatory support were placed on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (n = 29, 35.8%), a total artificial heart (n = 13, 16.0%), or a temporary or durable ventricular assist device (n = 39, 48.1%). Twelve patients (14.8%) were placed on a second device before retransplant. Thirty-nine percent of the mechanical circulatory support group were indicated for listing because of primary graft dysfunction or acute rejection versus 6% of the nonmechanical circulatory support group (P < .01). Likewise, 30% of patients in the mechanical circulatory support group were listed for cardiac allograft vasculopathy compared with 59% of the nonmechanical circulatory support group (P < .01). Thirty-day mortality was significantly higher in the mechanical circulatory support group (17.8% vs 4.8%, P < .01). However, patients who were bridged with a ventricular assist device or total artificial heart had comparable midterm outcomes to the nonmechanical circulatory support group. Conclusions: Patients who require mechanical circulatory support bridge to retransplantation belong to a high-risk cohort. Comparable midterm outcomes to the nonmechanical circulatory support cohort were demonstrated when patients' conditions allow for bridge with a ventricular assist device or total artificial heart. Bridging to retransplantation with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation remains a relative contraindication.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)171-181.e1
JournalJournal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
Volume158
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 2019
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • bridge to transplant
  • mechanical circulatory support
  • retransplant

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine
  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Outcomes of bridge to cardiac retransplantation in the contemporary mechanical circulatory support era'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this