Cardiac transplantation from non-viremic hepatitis C donors.

BACKGROUND: Hepatitis C (HCV) donors are rarely used for cardiac transplantation due to historically poor outcomes. In 2015, nucleic acid testing (NAT) for viral load was added to the routine work-up of organ donors, allowing for the distinction between subjects who remain viremic (HCV Ab+/NAT+) and those who have cleared HCV and are no longer viremic (HCV Ab+/NAT-). The American Society of Transplantation recently recommended that HCV Ab+/NAT- donors be considered non-infectious and safe for transplantation. We present our initial experience with such donors. METHODS: All patients were counseled regarding donor HCV antibody (Ab) and NAT. Transplant recipients were tested post-transplant at 1 week and at 1, 3, and 6 months for HCV seropositivity and viremia. We also analyzed the UNOS database to determine the potential impact of widespread acceptance of HCV Ab+/NAT- organs. RESULTS: Fourteen HCV Ab‒ subjects received hearts from HCV Ab+/NAT- donors in 2017. Over a median follow-up of 256 (192 to 377) days, 3 patients developed a reactive HCV Ab, yet none had a detectable HCV viral load during prospective monitoring at any time. Analysis of the UNOS database for the calendar year 2016 revealed that only 7 (3%) of 220 HCV Ab+/NAT- donors were accepted for heart transplantation. CONCLUSIONS: We have demonstrated the feasibility of utilizing HCV Ab+/NAT- donors for cardiac transplantation without recipient infection. A small percentage of recipients developed HCV Ab without evidence of viremia, possibly consistent with a biological false reactive test, as has been seen in other settings. Large-scale validation of our data may have a significant impact on transplantation rates.

Blood pressure and adverse events during continuous flow left ventricular assist device support.

BACKGROUND: Adverse events (AEs), such as intracranial hemorrhage, thromboembolic event, and progressive aortic insufficiency, create substantial morbidity and mortality during continuous flow left ventricular assist device support yet their relation to blood pressure control is underexplored. METHODS AND RESULTS: A multicenter retrospective review of patients supported for at least 30 days and ≤18 months by a continuous flow left ventricular assist device from June 2006 to December 2013 was conducted. All outpatient Doppler blood pressure (DOPBP) recordings were averaged up to the time of intracranial hemorrhage, thromboembolic event, or progressive aortic insufficiency. DOPBP was analyzed as a categorical variable grouped as high (>90 mm Hg; n=40), intermediate (80-90 mm Hg; n=52), and controlled (<80 mm Hg; n=31). Cumulative survival free from an AE was calculated using Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox hazard ratios were derived. Patients in the high DOPBP group had worse baseline renal function, lower angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker usage during continuous flow left ventricular assist device support, and a more prevalent history of hypertension. Twelve (30%) patients in the high DOPBP group had an AE, in comparison with 7 (13%) patients in the intermediate DOPBP group and only 1 (3%) in the controlled DOPBP group. The likelihood of an AE increased in patients with a high DOPBP (adjusted hazard ratios [95% confidence interval], 16.4 [1.8-147.3]; P=0.012 versus controlled and 2.6 [0.93-7.4]; P=0.068 versus intermediate). Overall, a similar association was noted for the risk of intracranial hemorrhage (P=0.015) and progressive aortic insufficiency (P=0.078) but not for thromboembolic event (P=0.638). Patients with an AE had a higher DOPBP (90±10 mm Hg) in comparison with those without an AE (85±10 mm Hg; P=0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In a population at risk, higher DOPBP during continuous flow left ventricular assist device support was significantly associated with a composite of AEs.

Readmissions after ventricular assist device: etiologies, patterns, and days out of hospital.

BACKGROUND: Scarce literature exists describing the patterns of readmission after continuous flow left ventricular assist device (CF-LVAD) implantation. These carry significant cost and quality of life implications. We sought to describe the etiology and pattern of readmission among patients receiving CF-LVADs. METHODS: Frequency, reason, urgency, and duration of readmission as well as freedom from readmission were examined in a retrospective review of our institutional experience. As an indirect means of quality of life, the ratio of days out of hospital (OOH)/days alive with device was calculated. RESULTS: From 2006 to 2011, 71 adult patients implanted with a CF device were included. Indication for device implantation was bridge to transplant (n=19), potential bridge to transplant (n=25), or destination therapy (n=27). Length of support averaged 359 days. Total support time was 69.7 patient years. One hundred fifty-five readmissions accounted for a total of 1,659 hospital days. Fifty-six patients were readmitted during the study period. Median time to first readmission was 48 days (range 2 to 663 days). Median length of stay was 5 days. The single most common etiology for readmission was gastrointestinal bleeding accounting for 14% of readmissions. Readmissions were urgent (87%), elective (10%), or life-threatening (3%). Patients on the average enjoyed 92% of their time OOH. CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing CF-LVAD support are often readmitted within 6 months of discharge. Readmissions tend to be of short duration and the most common reason is for gastrointestinal bleeding. Importantly, following discharge after implant procedure, 51 patients spent at least 90% of days OOH.