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.

Crossing low/moderate-level donor-specific antibodies during heart transplantation.

Donor-specific antibodies (DSAs) in patients prior to heart transplantation are associated with increased risk of rejection and can lead to longer waitlist times, but it is not known whether patients with low/moderate-level DSA at transplant have acceptable post-transplant outcomes. We performed a single-center, retrospective review to examine outcomes associated with crossing pre-existing low/moderate-level DSA. We assessed 864 patients awaiting heart transplantation between 2010 and 2018, identified 67 patients with low/moderate-level DSA and compared them to patients who were sensitized without DSA at the time of heart transplantation, as well as a control group of non-sensitized patients. Outcomes included 3-year survival, freedom from cardiac allograft vasculopathy (CAV), freedom from non-fatal major adverse cardiac events (NF-MACE), and 1-year freedom from rejection. In the first-year post-transplant, there was decreased freedom from antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) in the patients with pre-existing DSA compared with patients sensitized without DSA and non-sensitized patients. However, the DSA group experienced similar 3-year post-transplant survival, freedom from CAV, and freedom from NF-MACE compared with the other study groups. Our findings suggest that crossing low/moderate-level DSA does not lead to worse outcomes in heart transplantation and may offer a viable way to increase a sensitized patient's chance to obtain a suitable donor.

Impact of the United Network for organ sharing 2018 donor heart allocation system on transplant morbidity and mortality.

BACKGROUND: While the revised UNOS HTx donor allocation system aimed to minimize waitlist mortality by prioritizing more critically ill transplant candidates, there is concern for increased post-transplant morbidity and mortality. We examined the impact of the revised allocation system on waitlist and post-transplant outcomes at a high-volume transplant center. METHODS: One hundred and sixty nine adult patients underwent first-time single-organ HTx one year before (Era 1:79 patients) and after (Era 2:90 patients) implementation of the new allocation system (10/18/2018). Clinical characteristics, waitlist outcomes, and post-transplant morbidity and mortality were compared. RESULTS: Era 2 patients were twice as likely to be transplanted on temporary mechanical circulatory support (43% vs. 19%, p < .0001). While Era 2 waitlist time was shorter (10 vs. 43 days, p < .001), exception status requests (21.1% vs. 17.9%) and waitlist mortality (3.3% vs. 2.2%) were similar. There was no difference in primary graft dysfunction, intensive care unit or hospital length of stay, readmissions, rejection, allograft vasculopathy, or 1-year survival (91.1% vs. 93.7%). CONCLUSIONS: In a high-volume center, the revised HTx allocation system shortened waitlist time with no significant change in waitlist mortality or observed impact on post-transplant outcomes. With careful patient selection, the revised allocation system may optimize waitlist and post-transplant outcomes.

Heart transplantation in the era of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: Is it safe and feasible?

As the SARS-CoV-2-pandemic continues to unfold, the number of heart transplants completed in the United States has been declining steadily. The current case series examines the immediate short-term outcomes of seven heart transplant recipients transplanted during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. We hope to illustrate that with proper preparation, planning, and testing, heart transplantation can be continued during a pandemic. We assessed 7 patients transplanted from March 4, 2020, to April 15, 2020. The following endpoints were noted: in-hospital survival, in-hospital freedom from rejection, in-hospital nonfatal major cardiac adverse events (NF-MACE), severe primary graft dysfunction, hospital length of stay, and ICU length of stay. There were no expirations throughout the hospital admission. In addition, there were no patients with NF-MACE or treated rejection, and 1 patient developed severe primary graft dysfunction. Average length of stay was 17.2 days with a standard deviation of 5.9 days. ICU length of stay was 7.7 days with a standard deviation of 2.3 days. Despite the decreasing trend in completed heart transplants due to SARS-CoV-2, heart transplantation appears to be feasible in the immediate short term. Further follow-up is needed, however, to assess the impact of SARS-CoV-2 on post-heart transplant outcomes months after transplantation.

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.

Mechanical Circulatory Support as a Bridge-to-Transplant Candidacy: When Does It Work?

Durable mechanical circulatory support (dMCS) devices can be offered as a bridge-to-transplant (BTT) or as a bridge-to-candidacy (BTC) strategy for candidates with contraindications to transplant listing, including pulmonary hypertension (BTC-PH), morbid obesity (BTC-Obes), social issues (BTC-Soc), or chronic illness (BTC-Illness). An understanding of the trajectory of BTC patients could guide future triage of advanced heart failure patients who are not candidates for transplantation. We performed a retrospective review all patients who underwent dMCS implantation as either BTT (206 patients) or BTC (114 patients) at our center from January 1, 2010, to March 31, 2020. There was no significant difference in mortality between BTC patients and BTT patients. Compared with the BTT group, significantly more patients in the BTC-PH group were transplanted (81% vs. 63%; p < 0.05) and significantly fewer patients in the BTC-Obes group (44%; p < 0.05) and BTC-Soc group (39%; p < 0.05) were transplanted. Additionally, the readmission rate was higher for those in the BTC-Obes (6.2 vs. 2.1; p < 0.05) and BTC-Soc (3.9 vs. 2.1; p < 0.05) groups. Bridge-to-candidacy patients generally had poorer post-dMCS trajectories than BTT patients. Centers should not be dissuaded from pursuing a BTC strategy for qualified patients; however, careful consideration of potential adverse outcomes is necessary.

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.

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.

Heart transplant in Jehovah's Witness patients: A case-control study.

Heart transplantation (HTx) improves quality of life and survival in patients with advanced heart failure. Jehovah's Witnesses (JW) patients decline blood transfusion (including red cells, plasma and platelets) and are prohibited from heart transplantation at many centers. We report our experience with 20 consecutive JW patients with advanced heart failure who declined blood products referred to our center for HTx consideration. Of these, 7 were declined for transplant due to prior sternotomy, need for multi-organ transplant, or being too well. Of 13 JW patients accepted for heart transplant listing, 8 underwent HTx at our center. Compared to non-JW controls without prior cardiac surgery matched for age and listing status, JW HTx recipients had comparable incidence of primary graft dysfunction, rejection, allograft vasculopathy, and survival and hemoglobin up to 1 year. With appropriate selection, patients who are JW and decline blood products may successfully undergo heart transplantation.