Retrospective analysis of the impact of pre-transplant implantable cardioverter-defibrillator status on long-term prognosis in heart transplant patients.

BACKGROUND: Sudden cardiac death (SCD) post-heart transplantation affects 8%-35% of patients; however, the risk profile remains to be completely elucidated. While pre-transplant ICDs are typically removed during transplantation, no information exists to suggest if this pre-transplant risk stratification is also associated with post-transplant outcomes. The objective of this study was to assess the impact of pre-transplant ICD status on long-term prognosis post-heart transplant. METHODS: The United Network for Organ Sharing registry was queried for all adult heart transplant recipients from 2010 to 2018. Patients were categorized as with versus without ICD prior to heart transplantation. Survival was compared using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Proportional hazards regression analysis assessed the impact of ICDs adjusting for clinical and demographic covariates. RESULTS: Of 19 026 patients included, 78.6% (n = 14 960) had received an ICD at time of registration. Patients with an ICD were older [54.9 (±11.6) years vs. 48.6 (±15.3) years, p < .001], less likely to be female [25.7% (n = 3842) vs. 31.2% (n = 1269), p < .001], and more commonly diabetic [29.3% (n = 4376) vs 23.5% (n = 954), p < .001]. Kaplan-Meier analysis showed no difference in unadjusted survival trajectory by ICD status (chi-square = .48, p = .49). Survival was unrelated to ICD status in the multivariable model (HR = .98; 95% CI .90-1.07). CONCLUSIONS: Patients receiving an ICD pre-transplant had a higher prevalence of risk factors for SCD than non-ICD patients, yet ICD status prior to heart transplantation was not associated with a change in long-term prognosis post-heart transplantation.

Mechanical circulatory support for the visually impaired: is it appropriate?

Long-term mechanical circulatory support devices, especially left ventricular assist devices, are being increasingly utilized in the management of end-stage heart failure either as bridge to heart transplantation, recovery or as destination therapy. However, current technology for controllers and alarm systems for left ventricular assist devices does not permit their implantation in eligible patients with visual impairment. We report two patients in whom the decrease in visual acuity was a significant factor in determining eligibility for long-term mechanical circulatory support.