UNOS policy change benefits high-priority patients without harming those at low priority.

The heart transplantation policy change (PC) has improved outcomes in high-acuity (Old 1A, New 1-3) patients, but the effect on low-priority (Old 1B/2, New 4-6) patients is unknown. We sought to determine if low-priority patient outcomes were compromised by benefits to high-priority patients by evaluating for interaction between PC and priority status (PS). We included adult first-time heart transplant candidates and recipients from the UNOS registry during a 19-month period before and after the PC. We compared clinical characteristics and performed competing risks and survival analyses stratified by PC and PS. There was a dependence of PC and PS on waitlist death/deterioration with an interaction sub-distribution hazard ratio (adjusted sdHR) of 0.59 (0.45-0.78), p-value < .001. There was a trend toward a benefit of PC on waitlist death/deterioration (adjusted sdHR: 0.86 [0.73-1.01]; p = .07) and an increase in heart transplantation (adjusted sdHR: 1.08 [1.02-1.14], p = .007) for low-priority patients. There was no difference in 1-year post-transplant survival (log-rank p = .22) when stratifying by PC and PS. PC did not negatively affect waitlisted or transplanted low-priority patients. High-priority, post-PC patients had a targeted reduction in waitlist death/deterioration and did not come at the expense of worse post-transplant survival.

Effect of UNOS policy change and exception status request on outcomes in patients bridged to heart transplant with an intra-aortic balloon pump.

BACKGROUND: Intra-aortic balloon pumps (IABP) are used to bridge select end-stage heart disease patients to heart transplant (HT). IABP use and exception requests both increased dramatically after the UNOS policy change (PC). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of PC and exception status requests on waitlist and post-transplant outcomes in patients bridged to HT with IABP support. METHODS: We analyzed adult, first-time, single-organ HT recipients from the UNOS Registry either on IABP at the time of registration for HT or at the time of HT. We compared waitlist and post-HT outcomes between patients from the PRE (October 18, 2016 to May 30, 2018) and POST (October 18, 2018 to May 30, 2020) eras using Kaplan-Meier curves and time-to-event analyses. RESULTS: A total of 1267 patients underwent HT from IABP (261 pre-policy/1006 post-policy). On multivariate analysis, PC was associated with an increase in HT (sub-distribution hazard ratio (sdHR): 2.15, p < .001) and decrease in death/deterioration (sdHR: 0.55, p = .011) on the waitlist with no effect on 1-year post-HT survival (p = .8). The exception status of patients undergoing HT was predominantly seen in the POST era (29%, 293/1006); only four patients in the PRE era. Exception requests in the POST era did not alter patient outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: In patients bridged to heart transplant with an IABP, policy change is associated with decreased rates of death/deterioration and increased rates of heart transplantation on the waitlist without affecting 1-year post-transplant survival. While exception status use has markedly increased post-PC, it is not associated with patient outcomes.

Noninvasive methods to reduce cardiac complications postheart transplant.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Long-term success of heart transplantation is limited by allograft rejection and cardiac allograft vasculopathy (CAV). Classic management has relied on frequent invasive testing to screen for early features of rejection and CAV to allow for early treatment. In this review, we discuss new developments in the screening and prevention of allograft rejection and CAV. RECENT FINDINGS: Newer noninvasive screening techniques show excellent sensitivity and specificity for the detection of clinically significant rejection. New biomarkers and treatment targets continue to be identified and await further studies regarding their utility in preventing allograft vasculopathy. SUMMARY: Noninvasive imaging and biomarker testing continue to show promise as alternatives to invasive testing for allograft rejection. Continued validation of their effectiveness may lead to new surveillance protocols with reduced frequency of invasive testing. Furthermore, these noninvasive methods will allow for more personalized strategies to reduce the complications of long-term immunosuppression whereas continuing the decline in the overall rate of allograft rejection.

Controversies in the Postoperative Management of the Critically Ill Heart Transplant Patient.

Heart transplant recipients are susceptible to a number of complications in the immediate postoperative period. Despite advances in surgical techniques, mechanical circulatory support (MCS), and immunosuppression, evidence supporting optimal management strategies of the critically ill transplant patient is lacking on many fronts. This review identifies some of these controversies with the aim of stimulating further discussion and development into these gray areas.

Impella 5.5 Bridge to Heart Transplant: An Institutional Series and a Closer Look at Device Removal Technique.

Limited donor organ availability often necessitates mechanical circulatory support, and recently the Impella 5.5, as a bridge to heart transplant. Of 175 Impella 5.5-supported patients at our institution, 45 underwent transplantation in the largest series to date, for whom we analyzed outcomes. Two methods of complete device explant were evaluated: central Impella transection and removal via axillary graft. Median Impella days were 25 (16-41); median waitlist days were 21 (9-37). Eighty-nine percent (40/45) of patients had device placement via right axillary artery. Seventy-six percent (34/45) underwent central transection for device removal. Four patients (8.9%) required short-term venoarterial extracorporeal membranous oxygenation (VA ECMO) postoperatively for primary graft dysfunction (PGD). Two patients (4.4%) suffered postoperative stroke. Five patients (11.1%) required new RRT postoperatively. One patient (2.2%) returned to the operating room (OR) for axillary graft bleeding. A higher chance of procedural complications was found with the axillary removal technique (p = 0.014). Median intensive care unit (ICU) days, length of stay (LOS), and postoperative days to discharge were 46 (35-63), 59 (49-80), and 18 (15-24), respectively. Ninety-eight percent (44/45) survived to discharge. Thirty-day survival was 95.6% (43/45), with 1 year survival at 90.3% (28/31). Eighty-eight percent (37/42) remain without rejection. In our institutional experience, Impella 5.5 is a safe and reliable bridge to transplant.

Successful Pregnancy After Left Ventricular Assist Device Explantation for Myocardial Recovery.

A 36 year old woman with history of heart failure and left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation, with subsequent explantation after myocardial recovery, presented for management of preconception counseling and subsequent pregnancy. To our knowledge, this case represents the first documented successful pregnancy after LVAD explantation. Management details are provided, and relevant literature is reviewed.

Accuracy and correlation of bed and standing scale weights in monitoring volume status in heart failure patients.

Introduction: Accurate volume status monitoring is crucial for effective diuretic therapy in patients with acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF). While guidelines recommend daily standing body weight measurement as an indicator of volume status, bed scales are commonly used in healthcare facilities. Methods: A method-comparison design was used to compare bed and standing scale weights among adults hospitalized with ADHF at Los Angeles County-University of Southern California Medical Center between March and April 2023. Results & Conclusion: Among 51 weight pairs from 43 participants, a clinically significant mean difference of 1.42 ± 1.18 kg was observed, exceeding the recommended threshold. Inaccuracies, with 71% showing differences >0.6 kg, highlight potential fluid management errors when relying on bed scales in ADHF hospitalizations.

Assessment of Aortic Characteristic Impedance and Arterial Compliance from Non-invasive Carotid Pressure Waveform in The Framingham Heart Study.

The primary goal of this study was to test the hypothesis that a hybrid intrinsic frequency-machine learning (IF-ML) approach can accurately evaluate total arterial compliance (TAC) and aortic characteristic impedance (Zao) from a single noninvasive carotid pressure waveform in both women and men with heart failure (HF). TAC and Zao are cardiovascular biomarkers with established clinical significance. TAC is lower and Zao is higher in women than in men, so women are more susceptible to the consequent deleterious effects of them. Although the principles of TAC and Zao are pertinent to a multitude of cardiovascular diseases, including HF, their routine clinical use is limited because of the requirement for simultaneous measurements of flow and pressure waveforms. For this study, the data were obtained from the Framingham Heart Study (n = 6,201, 53% women). The reference values of Zao and TAC were computed from carotid pressure and aortic flow waveforms. IF parameters of carotid pressure waveform were used in ML models. IF models were developed on n = 5,168 of randomly selected data and blindly tested the remaining data (n = 1,033). The final models were evaluated in patients with HF. Correlations between IF-ML and reference values in all HF and HF with preserved ejection fraction for TAC were 0.88 and 0.90, and for Zao were 0.82 and 0.80, respectively. The classification accuracy in all HF and HF with preserved ejection fraction for TAC were 0.9 and 0.93, and for Zao were 0.81 and 0.89, respectively. In conclusion, the IF-ML method provides an accurate estimation of TAC and Zao in all subjects with HF and in the general population.

New UNOS allocation system associated with no added benefit in waitlist outcomes and worse post-transplant survival in heart-kidney patients.

BACKGROUND: The 2018 United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) heart transplant policy change (PC) sought to improve waitlist risk stratification to decrease waitlist mortality and promote geographically broader sharing for high-acuity patients awaiting heart transplantation. Our analysis sought to determine the effect of the UNOS PC on outcomes in patients waiting for, or who have received, a heart-kidney transplantation. METHODS: We analyzed adult (≥18 years old), first-time, heart-only and heart-kidney transplant candidates and recipients from the UNOS Registry. Patients were divided into pre-PC (PRE: October 18, 2016-May 30, 2018) and post-PC (POST: October 18, 2018-May 30, 2020) groups for comparison. Competing risks analysis (subdistribution and cause-specific hazards analyses) was performed to assess for differences in waitlist death/deterioration or heart transplantation. One-year post-transplant survival was assessed with Kaplan-Meier and Cox analyses. We included an interaction term (policy era × heart ± kidney) in our analyses to evaluate the effect of PC on outcomes in heart-kidney patients. RESULTS: One-year post-transplant survival was similar (p = 0.83) for PRE heart-kidney and heart-only recipients, but worse (p < 0.001) for POST heart-kidney vs heart-only recipients. There was a policy-era interaction between heart-kidney and heart-only recipients (HR 1.92[1.04,3.55], p = 0.038) indicating a detrimental effect of policy on 1-year survival in POST vs PRE heart-kidney recipients. No added beneficial effect of PC on waitlist outcomes in heart-kidney vs heart-only candidates was observed. CONCLUSIONS: There was no added policy-era benefit on waitlist outcomes for heart-kidney candidates when compared to heart-only candidates. POST heart-kidney recipients experienced worse 1-year survival compared to PRE heart-kidney recipients with no policy effect on heart-only recipients.

Effect of the UNOS policy change on rates of rejection, infection, and hospital readmission following heart transplantation.

BACKGROUND: The 2018 adult heart allocation policy sought to improve waitlist risk stratification, reduce waitlist mortality, and increase organ access. This system prioritized patients at greatest risk for waitlist mortality, especially individuals requiring temporary mechanical circulatory support (tMCS). Posttransplant complications are significantly higher in patients on tMCS before transplantation, and early posttransplant complications impact long-term mortality. We sought to determine if policy change affected early posttransplant complication rates of rejection, infection, and hospitalization. METHODS: We included all adult, heart-only, single-organ heart transplant recipients from the UNOS registry with pre-policy (PRE) individuals transplanted between November 1, 2016, and October 31, 2017, and post-policy (POST) between November 1, 2018, and October 31, 2019. We used a multivariable logistic regression analysis to assess the effect of policy change on posttransplant rejection, infection, and hospitalization. Two COVID-19 eras (2019-2020, 2020-2021) were included in our analysis. RESULTS: The majority of baseline characteristics were comparable between PRE and POST era recipients. The odds of treated rejection (p = 0.8), hospitalization (p = 0.69), and hospitalization due to rejection (p = 0.76) and infection (p = 0.66) were similar between PRE and POST eras; there was a trend towards reduced odds of rejection (p = 0.08). In both COVID eras, there was a clear reduction in rejection and treated rejection with no effect on hospitalization for rejection or infection. Odds of all-cause hospitalization was increased in both COVID eras. CONCLUSIONS: The UNOS policy change improves access to heart transplantation for higher acuity patients without increasing early posttransplant rates of treated rejection or hospitalization for rejection or infection, factors which portend risk for long-term posttransplant mortality.

Increasing Diversity in Cardiology: A Fellowship Director's Perspective.

Background Underrepresented-minorities (URM) remain few in number amongst practicing cardiologists and across cardiology fellowship training programs in the U.S. Increased diversity is needed across the entire field and is particularly necessary within graduate medical education cardiology fellowship training programs. Objectives This cross-sectional study was performed to identify which strategies were supported and implemented by cardiology fellowship program directors (PDs) to increase URM representation, to determine which entities hold the responsibility to increase diversity according to program directors, and to quantify URM representation in cardiology fellowship programs. Methods A 15-item survey was submitted to all American College of Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) accredited cardiology fellowship programs via electronic mail. Results Of 250 cardiology fellowship programs, 71 responses were received (28.4%). The number of URM faculty varied from 0-1 to more than six, and URM faculty held leadership roles in most programs (62.0%). A total of 16 respondents (22.5%) were URM program directors. Most respondents agreed that diversity was important to their training program (85.9%). The majority endorsed direct recruitment of URM applicants (60.6%), opportunities for applicants to connect with (54.9%) or be recruited by URM fellows (54.9%), holistic application review (67.6%), promoting mentorship by URM faculty (69.0%), URM faculty involvement in applicant interviewing (54.9%), and increased recruitment of URM faculty members (73.2%). Program directors allocated major responsibility to increase diversity to fellowship programs (71.8%), residency programs (63.3%), and medical schools (53.5%). Conclusions This study found that most cardiology programs have URM faculty in leadership roles, and nearly a quarter of the surveyed program directors were URMs. Cardiology program directors endorsed and employed numerous strategies to increase diversity and URM representation in fellowship programs. Additionally, program directors held fellowship training programs most responsible for increasing URM representation in the field of cardiology.

An invasive or conservative strategy in patients with diabetes mellitus and non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes: a collaborative meta-analysis of randomized trials.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to conduct a meta-analysis to examine an invasive or conservative strategy in diabetic versus nondiabetic patients. BACKGROUND: Diabetic patients are at increased risk of cardiovascular events after an acute coronary syndrome, yet it remains unknown whether they derive enhanced benefit from an invasive strategy. METHODS: Randomized trials comparing an invasive versus conservative treatment strategy were identified. The prevalence of cardiovascular events through 12 months was reported for each trial, stratified by diabetes mellitus status and randomized treatment strategy. Relative risk (RR) ratios and absolute risk reductions were combined using random-effects models. RESULTS: Data were combined across 9 trials comprising 9,904 subjects of whom 1,789 (18.1%) had diabetes mellitus. The RRs for death, nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), or rehospitalization with an acute coronary syndrome for an invasive versus conservative strategy were similar between diabetic patients (RR: 0.87; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.73 to 1.03) and nondiabetic patients (RR: 0.86; 95% CI: 0.70 to 1.06; p interaction = 0.83). An invasive strategy reduced nonfatal MI in diabetic patients (RR: 0.71; 95% CI: 0.55 to 0.92), but not in nondiabetic patients (RR: 0.98; 95% CI: 0.74 to 1.29; p interaction = 0.09). The absolute risk reduction in MI with an invasive strategy was greater in diabetic than nondiabetic patients (absolute risk reduction: 3.7% vs. 0.1%; p interaction = 0.02). There were no differences in death or stroke between groups (p interactions 0.68 and 0.20, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: An early invasive strategy yielded similar RR reductions in overall cardiovascular events in diabetic and nondiabetic patients. However, an invasive strategy appeared to reduce recurrent nonfatal MI to a greater extent in diabetic patients. These data support the updated guidelines that recommend an invasive strategy for patients with diabetes mellitus and non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes.