Chronic Intravenous Inotropic Support as Palliative Therapy and Bridge Therapy for Patients With Advanced Heart Failure: A Single-Center Experience.

BACKGROUND: Many patients with American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Stage D (advanced) heart failure are discharged home on chronic intravenous inotropic support (CIIS) as bridge to surgical therapy or as palliative therapy. This study analyzed the clinical trajectory of patients with advanced heart failure who were on home CIIS. METHODS: We conducted a single-institution, retrospective cohort study of patients on CIIS between 2010 and 2016 (n = 373), stratified by indication for initiation of inotropic support. Study outcomes were time from initiation of CIIS to cessation of therapy, time to death for patients who did not receive surgical therapy and rates of involvement with palliative care. RESULTS: Overall, patients received CIIS therapy for an average of 5.9 months (standard deviation [SD] 7.3). Patients on CIIS as palliative therapy died in an average of 6.2 months (SD 6.6) from the time of initiation of CIIS, and those on CIIS as bridge therapy who did not ultimately receive surgical therapy died after an average of 8.6 months (SD 9.3). Patients who received CIIS as bridge therapy were significantly less likely to receive palliative-care consultation than those on inotropes as palliative therapy, whether or not they underwent surgery. CONCLUSIONS: In this large cohort of patients with advanced HF, patients who on CIIS as palliative therapy survived for 6.2 months, on average, with wide variation among patients. Patients who were on CIIS as bridge therapy but did not ultimately receive surgical therapy received less palliative care despite the high mortality rate in this subgroup.

Benefits and Harms of Continuous Intravenous Inotropic Support as Palliative Therapy: A Single-Institution, Retrospective Analysis.

Use of continuous intravenous inotropic support (CIIS) strictly as palliative therapy for patients with ACC/AHA Stage D (end-stage) Heart Failure (HF) has increased significantly. The harms of CIIS therapy may detract from its benefits. To describe benefits (improvement in NYHA functional class) and harms (infection, hospitalization, days-spent-in-hospital) of CIIS as palliative therapy. Methods: Retrospective analysis of patients with end-stage HF initiated on CIIS as palliative therapy at an urban, academic center in the United States between 2014-2016. Clinical outcomes were extracted, and data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Seventy-five patients, 72% male, 69% African American/Black, with a mean age 64.5 years (SD = 14.5) met study criteria. Mean duration of CIIS was 6.5 months (SD = 7.7). Most patients (69.3%) experienced improvement in NYHA functional class from class IV to class III. Sixty-seven patients (89.3%) were hospitalized during their time on CIIS, with a mean of 2.7 hospitalizations per patient (SD = 3.3). One-third of patients (n = 25) required at least one intensive care unit (ICU) admission while on CIIS therapy. Eleven patients (14.7%) experienced catheter-related blood stream infection. Patients spent an average of 20.6% (SD = 22.8), approximately 40 days, of their time on CIIS admitted to the study institution. Patients on CIIS as palliative therapy report improvement in functional class, survive 6.5 months following initiation, but spend a significant number of days in the hospital. Prospective studies quantifying the symptomatic benefit and the direct and indirect harms of CIIS as palliative therapy are warranted.

Bridge to nowhere: A retrospective single-center study on patients using chronic intravenous inotropic support as bridge therapy who do not receive surgical therapy.

Background: Many patients with advanced heart failure (HF) are administered chronic intravenous inotropic support (CIIS) as bridge to surgical therapy; some ultimately never receive surgery. We aimed to describe reasons patients "crossover" from CIIS as bridge therapy to palliative therapy, and compare end-of-life outcomes to patients initiated on CIIS as palliative therapy. Methods: Single-institution, retrospective cohort study of patients on CIIS as bridge or palliative therapy between 2010 and 2016; data obtained through review of health records and multi-disciplinary selection meeting minutes, was analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics. Results: Of 246 patients discharged on CIIS as bridge therapy, 37 (16%) (male n = 28, 76%; African American n = 22, 60%) ultimately never received surgery. 67 matched patients on CIIS as palliative therapy were included for analysis (male n = 47, 70%; African American n = 47, 70%). The most common reasons for "crossover" from CIIS as bridge therapy to palliative therapy were frailty (n = 10, 27%), cardiac arrest (n = 5, 13.5%), and progressive non-cardiac illnesses (n = 6, 16.2%). A similar percentage of patients in the bridge (n = 28, 76%) and palliative (n = 48, 72%) groups died outside the hospital (P=0.66); however, fewer bridge patients received hospice care compared to the palliative group (35% vs 69%, P < 0.001). Comparing patients who died in the hospital, bridge patients (n = 9; 100%) were more likely to die in the intensive care unit than palliative patients (n = 8; 42%) (P < 0.001). Conclusion: Patients on CIIS as bridge therapy who do not ultimately receive surgical therapy "crossover" to palliative intention due to frailty, or development of or identification of serious illnesses. Nevertheless, these "bridge to nowhere" patients are less likely to receive palliative care or hospice and more likely to die in the intensive care unit than patients on CIIS as palliative therapy.