Three year post heart transplant outcomes of desensitized durable mechanical circulatory support patients.

BACKGROUND: The risks and benefits of desensitization therapy (DST) in highly sensitized mechanical circulatory support (MCS) patients are not well known. We investigated 3 year post-transplant outcomes of desensitized durable MCS patients. METHODS: Among 689 consecutively enrolled heart transplantation recipients between 2010 and 2016, we categorized them into Group A (desensitized MCS patients, n = 21), Group B (desensitized non-MCS patients, n = 28) and Group C (all nondesensitized patients, n = 640). Post-transplant outcomes included the incidence of primary graft dysfunction, 3-year survival, freedom from cardiac allograft vasculopathy, nonfatal major adverse cardiac events, any treated rejection, acute cellular rejection, antibody mediated rejection (AMR) and infectious complications. RESULTS: The types of DST in Groups A and B were similar and included combinations of rituximab/intravenous immunoglobulin and plasmapheresis/bortezomib. Group A, compared with Group B, showed significantly higher pre-DST panel reactive antibody (PRA) (92.2 ± 9.8 vs. 83.3 ± 15.6, P = 0.007) and higher PRA reduction after DST (-22.2 ± 26.9 vs. -6.3 ± 7.5, P = 0.015). Groups A and C showed comparable primary graft dysfunction, 3-year survival, freedom from cardiac allograft vasculopathy, nonfatal major adverse cardiac events, any treated rejection, acute cellular rejection, and AMR. Although statistically not significant, Group A showed numerically higher 3-year freedom from AMR than Group B. Infectious complications were similar in both Groups A and B. CONCLUSIONS: DST for MCS patients showed significant PRA reduction, resulting in an expansion of the donor pool. The post-transplant outcome of desensitized MCS patients showed comparable clinical outcomes to non-desensitized control patients in the same study period, revealing the safety and efficacy of DST.

Randomized Trial of Targeted Transendocardial Mesenchymal Precursor Cell Therapy in Patients With Heart Failure.

BACKGROUND: Mesenchymal precursor cells (MPCs) are allogeneic, immunoselected cells with anti-inflammatory properties that could improve outcomes in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). OBJECTIVES: This study assessed the efficacy and safety of MPCs in patients with high-risk HFrEF. METHODS: This randomized, double-blind, multicenter study evaluated a single transendocardial administration procedure of MPCs or sham-control in 565 intention-to-treat patients with HFrEF on guideline-directed therapies. The primary endpoint was time-to-recurrent events caused by decompensated HFrEF or successfully resuscitated symptomatic ventricular arrhythmias. Hierarchical secondary endpoints included components of the primary endpoint, time-to-first terminal cardiac events, and all-cause death. Separate and composite major adverse cardiovascular events analyses were performed for myocardial infarction or stroke or cardiovascular death. Baseline and 12-month echocardiography was performed. Baseline plasma high-sensitivity C-reactive protein levels were evaluated for disease severity. RESULTS: The primary endpoint was similar between treatment groups (HR: 1.17; 95% CI: 0.81-1.69; P = 0.41) as were terminal cardiac events and secondary endpoints. Compared with control subjects, MPCs increased left ventricular ejection fraction from baseline to 12 months, especially in patients with inflammation. MPCs decreased the risk of myocardial infarction or stroke by 58% (HR: 0.42; 95% CI: 0.23-0.76) and the risk of 3-point major adverse cardiovascular events by 28% (HR: 0.72; 95% CI: 0.51-1.03) in the analysis population (n = 537), and by 75% (HR: 0.25; 95% CI: 0.09-0.66) and 38% (HR: 0.62; 95% CI: 0.39-1.00), respectively, in patients with inflammation (baseline high-sensitivity C-reactive protein ≥2 mg/L). CONCLUSIONS: The primary and secondary endpoints of the trial were negative. Positive signals in prespecified, and post hoc exploratory analyses suggest MPCs may improve outcomes, especially in patients with inflammation.

Coronary Vasospasm Causing Chest Pain in Early Postoperative Heart Transplantation.

Coronary vasospasm is a rare complication after heart transplant. Due to denervation of the donor heart, patients are typically asymptomatic but may present with cardiac arrhythmias or cardiac arrest. We present a patient with a recent heart transplant who experienced chest pain and was found to have coronary vasospasm.

Dapsone-Associated Anemia in Heart Transplant Recipients with Normal Glucose-6-Phosphate Dehydrogenase Activity.

Dapsone is considered an alternative for pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia (PJP) prophylaxis in sulfa-allergic or -intolerant transplant patients with normal glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) activity. Despite normal G6PD activity, anemia can still occur while on dapsone therapy. We retrospectively reviewed heart transplant patients transplanted at our center between January 2016 and June 2018 and identified those taking dapsone prophylaxis. There were 252 heart transplant recipients at our center between January 2016 and June 2018. 36 patients received dapsone prophylaxis. All had normal G6PD activity assessed prior to dapsone initiation. 8 (22%) patients developed significant anemia attributed to dapsone: 2 were hospitalized for anemia, 1 of whom required blood transfusion. These patients had a median reduction in hemoglobin of 2.1 g/dL from baseline prior to dapsone initiation. Overt evidence of hemolysis was present in six patients. Once dapsone was discontinued, Hgb increased by at least 2 g/dL in a median of 30 days. Anemia from dapsone may occur in a significant proportion of patients despite normal G6PD activity and resulting in significant morbidity. Careful monitoring of transplant recipients on dapsone prophylaxis is warranted, as well as consideration of alternative agents.

Characteristics and outcomes of heart transplant recipients with a pretransplant history of malignancy.

We aimed to investigate the characteristics and outcomes of HTx recipients with a history of pretransplant malignancy (PTM). Among 1062 HTx recipients between 1997 and 2013, 73 (7.1%) patients had PTMs (77 cancer cases). We analyzed post-HTx outcome, recurrence of PTM, and development of de novo malignancies. Post-HTx outcome included overall survival, 10-year survival, 10-year freedom from cardiac allograft vasculopathy (CAV), non-fatal major adverse cardiac events (NF-MACE), any treated rejection (ATR), acute cellular rejection (ACR), and antibody-mediated rejection (AMR). Four most common PTMs were lymphoproliferative disorders (18.2%), prostate cancers (18.2%), non-melanoma skin cancers (18.2%), and breast cancers (13.0%). Median time from PTM and HTx was 9.0 years. During a median follow-up of 8.6 years after HTx, patients with PTM, compared to those without, showed significantly higher incidence of posttransplant malignancies (43.8% vs. 20.8%, p < .001) including 9.6% (n = 7) of PTM recurrences. However, patients with PTM, compared to those without, showed comparable overall survival, 10-year survival, 10-year freedom from CAV, NF-MACE, ATR, ACR, and AMR. Therefore, a history of PTM should not disqualify patients from HTx listing, while further research is necessary for early detection of posttransplant malignancies in these patients.

Characteristics, outcomes, and predictors of de novo malignancy after heart transplantation.

Background: Post-transplant malignancy (PTM) causes long-term morbidity and mortality in heart transplant (HTx) recipients. However, the detailed characteristics or predictors of PTM are not well-known. We evaluated the incidence, characteristics, long-term outcomes, and predictors of de novo PTM using a single center large-volume database. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the types and characteristics of de novo PTM in 989 patients who underwent HTx. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used for the PTM prediction model. Results: Two hundred and six patients (20.8%) had de novo PTMs (241 cancers) during a median follow-up of 11.5 years. PTM patients were older than non-PTM patients, received immunosuppressive therapy for a longer period, and were more likely to be male and white. Skin cancers were the most frequent types of malignancy (60.6%) followed by prostate (9.5%), lung (7.1%), and breast (4.1%) cancers. Although most cancers (88.8%) were surgically resected at initial presentation, about half (47.3%) recurred or progressed. Patients with skin cancer and non-skin cancer had significantly lower overall survival (P < 0.001) than patients without cancer. Older age (P < 0.001), white race (P = 0.001), and longer time receiving immunosuppressive therapy (P < 0.001) were independent predictors for PTM. Conclusion: Older age, white race, and longer administration of immunosuppressive therapies were independent risk factors for PTM, which was associated with increased mortality. Further research is necessary for the prevention and early detection of PTM in HTx recipients.

Post-transplantation outcomes of sensitized patients receiving durable mechanical circulatory support.

BACKGROUND: Sensitization, defined as the presence of circulating antibodies, presents challenges, particularly in patients undergoing heart transplantation (HTx) bridged with durable mechanical circulatory support (MCS). We aimed to investigate the post-transplantation outcomes of sensitized MCS patients. METHODS: Among 889 consecutively enrolled heart transplant (HTx) recipients between 2010 and 2018, 86 (9.7%) sensitized MCS patients (Group A) were compared with sensitized non-MCS patients (Group B, n = 189), non-sensitized MCS patients (Group C, n = 162), and non-sensitized non-MCS patients (Group D, n = 452) regarding post-HTx outcomes, including the incidence of primary graft dysfunction (PGD), 1-year survival, and 1-year freedom from antibody-mediated rejection (AMR). RESULTS: Sensitized MCS patients (Group A) showed comparable rates of PGD, 1-year survival, and 1-year freedom from AMR with Groups C and D. However, Group A showed significantly higher rates of 1-year freedom from AMR (95.3% vs 85.7%, p = 0.02) and an earlier decline in panel-reactive antibody (PRA) levels (p < 0.01) than sensitized non-MCS patients (Group B). Desensitization therapy effectively reduced the levels of PRA in both Groups A and B. When Group A was further divided according to the presence of preformed donor-specific antibodies (DSA), patients with preformed DSA showed significantly lower rates of 1-year freedom from AMR than those without (84.2% vs 98.5%, p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Sensitized MCS patients showed significantly lower rates of AMR and an earlier decline in PRA levels following HTx than sensitized non-MCS patients. Removal of MCS at the time of transplantation might underlie these observations.

Eculizumab for antibody-mediated rejection in heart transplantation: A case-control study.

Complement inhibition offers a novel treatment approach for antibody-mediated rejection (AMR). We examined patients with hemodynamic compromise AMR 2010-2020, comparing eight patients supplemented with eculizumab to 10 patients without; administration was at the treating physician's discretion. There were no significant differences between groups though eculizumab patients had a non-significantly higher inotrope score (208.8 mcg/kg/min vs. 2.6 mcg/kg/min; P = .22), more extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) (62.5% vs. 20%; P = .066), and worse 1-year survival (37.5% vs. 60%; P = .63). The role of eculizumab is uncertain in AMR; multicenter collaborative studies are essential to better define its role.

Recipient and surgical factors trigger severe primary graft dysfunction after heart transplant.

BACKGROUND: Primary graft dysfunction (PGD) is a major cause of early mortality following heart transplant (HT). The International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation (ISHLT) subdivides PGD into 3 grades of increasing severity. Most studies have assessed risk factors for PGD without distinguishing between PGD severity grade. We sought to identify recipient, donor and surgical risk factors specifically associated with mild/moderate or severe PGD. METHODS: We identified 734 heart transplant recipients at our institution transplanted between January 1, 2012 and December 31, 2018. PGD was defined according to modified ISHLT criteria. Recipient, donor and surgical variables were analyzed by multinomial logistic regression with mild/moderate or severe PGD as the response. Variables significant in single variable modeling were subject to multivariable analysis via penalized logistic regression. RESULTS: PGD occurred in 24% of the cohort (n = 178) of whom 6% (n = 44) had severe PGD. One-year survival was reduced in recipients with severe PGD but not in those with mild or moderate PGD. Multivariable analysis identified 3 recipient factors: prior cardiac surgery, recipient treatment with ACEI/ARB/ARNI plus MRA, recipient treatment with amiodarone plus beta-blocker, and 3 surgical factors: longer ischemic time, more red blood cell transfusions, and more platelet transfusions, that were associated with severe PGD. We developed a clinical risk score, ABCE, which provided acceptable discrimination and calibration for severe PGD. CONCLUSIONS: Risk factors for mild/moderate PGD were largely distinct from those for severe PGD, suggesting a differing pathophysiology involving several biological pathways. Further research into mechanisms underlying the development of PGD is urgently needed.

Intermediate-term outcomes of heart transplantation for cardiac amyloidosis in the current era.

BACKGROUND: Cardiac amyloidosis (CA) has been historically noted with poor outcomes after heart transplant (HTx). However, strict patient selection, appropriate multi-organ transplant, and aggressive post-transplant therapy can result in favorable outcomes. We present the experience in the largest single-center cohort of CA patients post-HTx in the recent era. METHODS: Between January 2010 and December 2018, 51 CA patients underwent HTx-13 light-chain amyloidosis (AL) and 38 transthyretin amyloidosis (ATTR), 49 were included. Endpoints included 3-year survival, freedom from cardiac allograft vasculopathy (CAV), and freedom from non-fatal major adverse cardiac events (NF-MACE). RESULTS: Overall 3-year survival was 81.6% (69.2% for AL and 86% for ATTR) and was comparable to survival for patients transplanted for non-amyloid restrictive cardiomyopathy (RCM) in the same period (89%, p = .46). Three-year freedom from CAV (84% vs. 89%, p = .98), NF-MACE (82% vs. 83%, p = .96), and any-treated rejection (95% vs. 89%, p = .54) were also comparable in both groups. No recurrence in amyloid was noted in endomyocardial biopsies. Six patients (46%) with AL amyloidosis underwent autologous stem cell transplant 1-year post-HTx, and two patients (8%) with variant ATTR-CA underwent combined heart-liver transplant due to cardiac cirrhosis. CONCLUSION: In the current era, both AL and ATTR cardiac amyloidosis patients have acceptable outcomes after heart transplantation.

Total Artificial Heart as Bridge to Cardiac Retransplantation.

Mechanical circulatory support has been performed as a bridge to cardiac retransplantation in selected patients with graft failure. However, there is limited published experience on the use and potential benefit of the total artificial heart (TAH) as a bridge to cardiac retransplantation. We report on our institutional experience with 3 patients that received TAH as a bridge to retransplant, with 1 patient surviving post-retransplantation. This case series demonstrates the high-risk nature of this undertaking in cardiac retransplant candidates and highlights the issue of sensitization portending greater risk for poor outcomes after TAH as bridge to retransplantation.

Heart Transplantation for Giant Cell Myocarditis: A Case Series.

BACKGROUND: Giant cell myocarditis (GCM) has a poor prognosis without heart transplant, but post-transplant survival is unknown. PURPOSE: To describe the post-transplant survival of patients with GCM at a large transplant center. METHODS: Seven patients underwent heart transplant for histologically confirmed GCM of the explanted heart. The median age was 59 years, and 43% (3 of 7) were female. All patients had cardiogenic shock, multiorgan failure, elevated troponin, and recurrent ventricular tachycardia, and some required mechanical circulatory support. All patients received rabbit antithymocyte globulin (rATG) in the perioperative period at a dose of 1.5 mg/kg daily for 1 to 5 days and 4 received intravenous immunoglobulin 1 g/kg daily for 2 days after rATG. All patients had early initiation of tacrolimus by first to third postoperative day depending on renal function, early mycophenolate, and high dose steroid. All were maintained using tacrolimus, mycophenolate, and prednisone. RESULTS: One patient had asymptomatic recurrence of GCM at 3 months, managed by up-titration of tacrolimus, and had asymptomatic 2R cellular rejection at 4 months, managed with steroid bolus. No patient had high-grade rejection. One patient died at 267 days, possibly of GCM. Six of 7 (86%) remain alive at a median of 842 days (2.3 years) post transplant. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with GCM have excellent post-transplant survival with use of rATG and triple drug immunosuppressive therapy; however, some patients remain at risk for GCM recurrence after transplant, which may respond to augmented immunosuppression.

Heart Transplant Immunosuppression Strategies at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center.

Heart transplant is the optimal treatment for selected patients with end-stage heart failure. Immunosuppression after heart transplantation has significantly reduced the incidence of rejection and improved patient outcomes with the routine use of calcineurin inhibitors. Antimetabolites and proliferation signal inhibitors add to the improvement in patient outcomes as well. The goal of induction therapy is to provide intense immunosuppression when the risk of allograft rejection is highest. Most maintenance immunosuppressive protocols employ a 3-drug regimen consisting of a calcineurin inhibitor, an antimetabolite agent and glucocorticoids. The management of rejection proceeds in a stepwise fashion based on the severity of rejection detected on biopsy and the patient's clinical presentation. This review will cover induction, maintenance, rejection therapy and some special considerations including sensitization, renal sparing protocol, and corticosteroid weaning. It will end in consideration of potential future directions in immunosuppressive strategies to promote patient and graft survival.

cBIN1 Score (CS) Identifies Ambulatory HFrEF Patients and Predicts Cardiovascular Events.

BACKGROUND: Cardiac Bridging Integrator 1 (cBIN1) is a membrane deformation protein that generates calcium microdomains at cardiomyocyte t-tubules, whose transcription is reduced in heart failure, and is released into blood. cBIN1 score (CS), an inverse index of plasma cBIN1, measures cellular myocardial remodeling. In patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), CS diagnoses ambulatory heart failure and prognosticates hospitalization. The performance of CS has not been tested in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). METHODS AND RESULTS: CS was determined from plasma of patients recruited in a prospective study. Two comparative cohorts consisted of 158 ambulatory HFrEF patients (left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤ 40%, 57 ± 10 years, 80% men) and 115 age and sex matched volunteers with no known history of HF. N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) concentrations were also analyzed for comparison. CS follows a normal distribution with a median of 0 in the controls, which increases to a median of 1.9 (p < 0.0001) in HFrEF patients. CS correlates with clinically assessed New York Heart Association Class (p = 0.007). During 1-year follow-up, a high CS (≥ 1.9) in patients predicts increased cardiovascular events (43% vs. 26%, p = 0.01, hazard ratio 1.9). Compared to a model with demographics, clinical risk factors, and NT-proBNP, adding CS to the model improved the overall continuous net reclassification improvement (NRI 0.64; 95% CI 0.18-1.10; p = 0.006). Although performance for diagnosis and prognosis was similar to CS, NT-proBNP did not prognosticate between patients whose NT-proBNP values were > 400 pg/ml. CONCLUSION: CS, which is mechanistically distinct from NT-proBNP, successfully differentiates myocardial health between patients with HFrEF and matched controls. A high CS reflects advanced NYHA stage, pathologic cardiac muscle remodeling, and predicts 1-year risk of cardiovascular events in ambulatory HFrEF patients. CS is a marker of myocardial remodeling in HFrEF patients, independent of volume status.

JC virus-associated nephropathy in a post-heart and -kidney transplantation patient.

JC virus-associated nephropathy is rare in kidney transplant recipients, and even rarer in recipients of other solid organ transplants. We present a case of JC virus-associated nephropathy in a heart-kidney transplant recipient, which to our knowledge is the first case reported in the literature. We discuss the findings on renal biopsy for JC virus nephropathy and our management approach to this rare complication.

Mechanical circulatory support for cardiac amyloidosis.

BACKGROUND: Cardiac amyloidosis, typically from abnormal deposition of AL or ATTR amyloid protein, can result in heart failure requiring transplantation (HTx). The role of mechanical circulatory support (MCS) is not well-established. The purpose of this study was to present our experience with MCS in patients with cardiac amyloidosis. METHODS: Consecutive patients with cardiac amyloidosis who received MCS at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center between 2010 and 2018 were reviewed. Clinical characteristics and outcomes were compared to a control group of MCS patients without amyloid matched 2:1 for age and INTERMACS Profile. RESULTS: 11 amyloid patients underwent durable MCS, two with paracorporeal biventricular assist devices and 9 with total artificial hearts. No patients received isolated left ventricular assist device support. By 1 year, 9 (82%) of patients in the MCS-Amyloid group had been transplanted and 2 (18%) had died. In the MCS-No Amyloid group, by 1 year, 8 (36%) of patients had been transplanted, 10 (46%) had died, and 4 (18%) were still living with MCS. CONCLUSIONS: Over a 9-year period, patients with amyloid cardiomyopathy who required MCS at our institution all received durable biventricular MCS. For carefully selected patients, this approach is feasible with acceptable outcomes as bridge to transplantation.

Combined heart and kidney transplantation-Is there a protective effect against cardiac allograft vasculopathy using intravascular ultrasound?

BACKGROUND: Because cardiac and renal disease are physiologically related and often coexist, the prevalence of combined heart and kidney transplantation (HKTx) has significantly increased over the last few years. It has been suggested that combined organ allografts modulate the immune system favorably for one or both allografts resulting in successful clinical outcomes. However, whether the addition of kidney transplantation has a protective immune effect against developing cardiac allograft vasculopathy (CAV) has not been fully investigated. METHODS: From March 2010 to September 2018, 30 HKTx recipients who had baseline (4-6 weeks) and 1-year intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) were matched with 60 isolated heart transplant (HTx-alone) recipients using propensity scores. First-year changes in maximal intimal thickness (MIT), maximal intimal area (MIA), maximal percent stenosis (MPS), percent atheroma volume (PAV), and incidence of rapid plaque progression were compared between the groups. RESULTS: First-year coronary plaque progression was significantly decreased in HKTx recipients compared with HTx-alone recipients by change in the MIT (0.11 ± 0.14 mm vs 0.40 ± 0.32 mm, p < 0.001), MIA (0.52 ± 1.52 mm2 vs 1.86 ± 2.68 mm2, p = 0.002), MPS (2.10% ± 5.64 percentage points vs 7.22% ± 8.59 percentage points, p = 0.001), and PAV (1.62% ± 3.07 percentage points vs 5.90% ± 5.92 percentage points, p < 0.001). Rapid plaque progression occurred in 2 of 30 in HKTx (6.7%) and in 22 of 60 HTx alone (36.7%), p = 0.002. CONCLUSIONS: Combined heart and kidney transplantation is associated with a decrease in CAV by coronary plaque progression on IVUS. These results suggest that HKTx may have an immune modulating benefit over HTx alone.

The Potential Role of Dysregulated miRNAs in Alzheimer's Disease Pathogenesis and Progression.

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a debilitating neurodegenerative disease that affects the cognitive faculties of millions of people worldwide. There is still no known cure for AD, nor a clear understanding of AD etiology. Nevertheless, researchers have made significant strides in understanding various key aspects of AD neuropathology at the cellular and molecular levels. This review is intended to provide a general survey of what is known and unknown, based on the three hallmarks of AD, combined with our knowledge from microRNA research. Our goal is to reevaluate and reassess the current direction of AD research and therapeutic insights, charting a new course and comprehensive plan to combat this imminent global health threat.

Combined Heart and Kidney Transplantation: Clinical Experience in 100 Consecutive Patients.

Background Combined heart and kidney transplantation ( HKT x) is performed in patients with severe heart failure and advanced renal insufficiency. We analyzed the long-term survival after HKT x, the influence of age and dialysis status, the rates of cardiac rejection, and the influence of sensitization. Methods and Results From June 1992 to December 2016, we performed 100 HKT x procedures. We compared older (≥60 years, n=53) with younger (<60 years, n=47) recipients, and recipients on preoperative dialysis (n=49) and not on dialysis (n=51). We analyzed actuarial freedom from any cardiac rejection, acute cellular rejection, and antibody-mediated rejection, and survival rates by sensitized status with panel-reactive antibody levels <10%, 10% to 50%, and >50%, and compared these survival rates with those from the United Network for Organ Sharing database. There was no difference in 15-year survival between the 2 age groups (35±12.4% and 49±17.3%, ≥60 versus <60 years; P=0.45). There was no difference in 15-year survival between the dialysis and nondialysis groups (44±13.4% and 37±15.2%, P=0.95). Actuarial freedom from any cardiac rejection ( acute cellular rejection >0 or antibody-mediated rejection >0) was 92±2.8% and 84±3.8%, acute cellular rejection (≥2R/3A) 98±1.5% and 94±2.5%, and antibody-mediated rejection (≥1) 96±2.1% and 93±2.6% at 30 days and 1 year after HKT x. There was no difference in the 5-year survival among recipients by sensitization status with panel-reactive antibody levels <10%, 10% to 50%, and >50% (82±5.9%, 83±10.8%, and 92±8.0%; P=0.55). There was no difference in 15-year survival after HKT x between the United Network for Organ Sharing database and our center (38±3.2% and 40±10.1%, respectively; P=0.45). Conclusions HKT x is safe to perform in patients 60 years and older or younger than 60 years and with or without dialysis dependence, with excellent outcomes. The degree of panel-reactive antibody sensitization did not appear to affect survival after HKT x.

Predicted heart mass is the optimal metric for size match in heart transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Donor-recipient size match is traditionally assessed by body weight. We assessed the ability of 5 size match metrics-predicted heart mass (PHM), weight, height, body mass index (BMI) and body surface area (BSA)-to predict 1-year mortality after heart transplant and to assess the effect of size match on donor heart turn down for size. METHODS: The study cohort comprised 19,168 adult heart transplant recipients in the United Network for Organ Sharing registry between 2007 and 2016. Each size match metric was divided into 7 equally sized groups using the donor-recipient ratio for each metric. Single and multivariable Cox proportional hazard models for mortality 1 year after transplant were constructed. RESULTS: Recipients in the severely (donor-recipient PHM ratio 0.54-0.86) undersized group for PHM experienced increased mortality, with a hazard ratio of 1.34 (95% confidence interval, 1.13-1.59; p < 0.001). There was no increased risk of death at 1 year if donors were undersized for weight, height, BMI, or BSA. We found that 32% of heart offers turned down for donor size would be acceptable using a PHM threshold of 0.86 or greater and that 14% of offers accepted (most of which are female donor to male recipient) were below this threshold. CONCLUSIONS: PHM is the optimal donor-recipient size match metric for prediction of mortality after heart transplant. Many offers turned down for donor size were above the threshold for adequacy of size match by PHM identified, and thus, the use of PHM could improve donor heart utilization and post-transplant survival.