Prevalence, Characteristics, and Prognostic Relevance of Donor-Transmitted Coronary Artery Disease in Heart Transplant Recipients.

BACKGROUND: The reported prevalence of donor-transmitted coronary artery disease (TCAD) in heart transplantation (HT) is variable, and its prognostic impact remains unclear. OBJECTIVES: The goal of this study was to characterize TCAD in a contemporary multicentric cohort and to study its prognostic relevance. METHODS: This was a retrospective study of consecutive patients >18 years old who underwent HT in 11 Spanish centers from 2008 to 2018. Only patients with a coronary angiography (c-angio) within the first 3 months after HT were studied. Significant TCAD (s-TCAD) was defined as any stenosis ≥50% in epicardial coronary arteries, and nonsignificant TCAD (ns-TCAD) as stenosis <50%. Clinical outcomes were assessed by means of Cox regression and competing risks regression. Patients were followed-up for a median period of 6.3 years after c-angio. RESULTS: From a cohort of 1,918 patients, 937 underwent c-angio. TCAD was found in 172 patients (18.3%): s-TCAD in 65 (6.9%) and ns-TCAD in 107 (11.4%). Multivariable Cox regression analysis did not show a statistically significant association between s-TCAD and all-cause mortality (adjusted HR: 1.44; 95% CI: 0.89-2.35; P = 0.141); however, it was an independent predictor of cardiovascular mortality (adjusted HR: 2.25; 95% CI: 1.20-4.19; P = 0.011) and the combined event cardiovascular death or nonfatal MACE (adjusted HR: 2.42; 95% CI: 1.52-3.85; P < 0.001). No statistically significant impact of ns-TCAD on clinical outcomes was detected. The results were similar when reassessed by means of competing risks regression. CONCLUSIONS: TCAD was not associated with reduced survival in patients alive and well enough to undergo post-HT angiography within the first 3 months; however, s-TCAD patients showed increased risk of cardiovascular death and MACE.

Asistencia ventricular de larga duración en España (2007-2020). I informe del registro REGALAD / Durable ventricular assist device in Spain (2007-2020). First report of the REGALAD registry

Introducción y objetivos Se presentan las características clínicas, los resultados y las complicaciones de todos los pacientes a los que se implantó un dispositivo de asistencia circulatoria mecánica de larga duración en España entre 2007 y 2020. Métodos Análisis a partir del Registro español de asistencia ventricular de larga duración (REGALAD) en el que participaron los centros españoles con programa de asistencia ventricular mecánica. Resultado En este periodo se implantaron 263 dispositivos de asistencia ventricular de larga duración en 22 hospitales. En 182 pacientes (69%) la asistencia fue ventricular izquierda de flujo continuo; en 79 (30%), de flujo pulsátil (58 izquierdas y 21 biventriculares), y en 2 (1%) se implantó un corazón artificial total. El objetivo de la asistencia fue el puente al trasplante en 78 pacientes (30%), puente a la candidatura en 110 (42%), puente a la recuperación en 3 (1%) y la terapia de destino en 72 (27%). La supervivencia total a 6, 12 y 24 meses fue del 79, el 74 y el 69% respectivamente, y la mejor se consiguió con las asistencias izquierdas de flujo continuo (el 84, el 80 y el 75%). Las principales complicaciones asociadas fueron: infecciones (el 37% de los pacientes), hemorragias (35%), neurológicas (29%) y disfunción de la asistencia (17%). Conclusiones Las asistencias ventriculares de larga duración han irrumpido en España como un tratamiento útil en la insuficiencia cardiaca avanzada. Como en otros registros internacionales, se tiende a utilizar dispositivos izquierdos intracorpóreos de flujo continuo, que se asocian con mejores resultados. Las complicaciones relacionadas siguen siendo frecuentes y graves (AU)

Introduction and objectives This report presents the clinical characteristics, outcomes and complications of all consecutive patients implanted with a long-term mechanical circulatory support device in Spain between 2007 and 2020. Methods Analysis of the Spanish Registry of durable ventricular assist devices (REGALAD) including data form Spanish centers with a mechanical circulatory support program. Results During the study period, 263 ventricular assist devices were implanted in 22 hospitals. The implanted device was an isolated continuous-flow left ventricular assist device in 182 patients (69%), a pulsatile-flow device (58 isolated left ventricular and 21 biventricular) in 79 (30%), and a total artificial heart in 2 patients (1%). The strategy of the implant was as bridge to heart transplant in 78 patients (30%), bridge to candidacy in 110 (42%), bridge to recovery in 3 (1%) and destination therapy in 72 patients (27%). Overall survival at 6, 12 and 24 months was 79%, 74% and 69%, respectively, and was better in continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices (84%, 80%, and 75%). The main adverse events related to this therapy were infections (37% of patients), bleeding (35%), neurological (29%), and device malfunction (17%). Conclusions Durable ventricular assist devices have emerged in Spain in the last few years as a useful therapy for patients with advanced heart failure. As in other international registries, the current trend is to use continuous-flow intracorporeal left ventricular devices, which are associated with better results. Adverse events continue to be frequent and severe (AU)

Durable ventricular assist device in Spain (2007-2020). First report of the REGALAD registry.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: This report presents the clinical characteristics, outcomes and complications of all consecutive patients implanted with a long-term mechanical circulatory support device in Spain between 2007 and 2020. METHODS: Analysis of the Spanish Registry of durable ventricular assist devices (REGALAD) including data form Spanish centers with a mechanical circulatory support program. RESULTS: During the study period, 263 ventricular assist devices were implanted in 22 hospitals. The implanted device was an isolated continuous-flow left ventricular assist device in 182 patients (69%), a pulsatile-flow device (58 isolated left ventricular and 21 biventricular) in 79 (30%), and a total artificial heart in 2 patients (1%). The strategy of the implant was as bridge to heart transplant in 78 patients (30%), bridge to candidacy in 110 (42%), bridge to recovery in 3 (1%) and destination therapy in 72 patients (27%). Overall survival at 6, 12 and 24 months was 79%, 74% and 69%, respectively, and was better in continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices (84%, 80%, and 75%). The main adverse events related to this therapy were infections (37% of patients), bleeding (35%), neurological (29%), and device malfunction (17%). CONCLUSIONS: Durable ventricular assist devices have emerged in Spain in the last few years as a useful therapy for patients with advanced heart failure. As in other international registries, the current trend is to use continuous-flow intracorporeal left ventricular devices, which are associated with better results. Adverse events continue to be frequent and severe.