Comparative analysis of regional outcomes and adverse events after continuous-flow left ventricular assist device implantation: An IMACS analysis
Mirza KK, Xie R, Cowger J, Kirklin JK, Meyns B, Gustafsson F, Shaw SM, and Goldstein DJ. Comparative analysis of regional outcomes and adverse events after continuous-flow left ventricular assist device implantation: An IMACS analysis. J Heart Lung Transplant 2020; 39(9):904-914.
The Journal of heart and lung transplantation
INTRODUCTION: Regional outcomes after implantation of continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) have not been described. We examined differences in patient selection, survival, and adverse events across 3 geographic regions of the world: the Americas, Asia-Pacific, and Europe.
METHODS: Using data from The International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support registry, all adult patients implanted with a continuous-flow LVADs were included in this International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support analysis (n = 15,560), of whom, 9,988 (64%) received axial-flow devices and 5,572 (36%) received centrifugal-flow devices.
RESULTS: There were significant interregional differences in the rate of implantation of patients aged >70 years (Americas: 14%, Asia-Pacific: 1%, Europe: 5%; p < 0.0001), morbidly obese (Americas: 5%, Asia-Pacific: 1%, Europe: 1%; p < 0.0001), male (Americas: 79%, Asia-Pacific: 77%, Europe: 85%; p < 0.0001), and implanted as destination therapy (Americas: 48%, Asia-Pacific: 4%, Europe: 22%; p < 0.0001). The rates of centrifugal pump usage varied by region (Americas: 30%, Asia-Pacific: 34%, Eu: 74%; p < 0.0001). Survival rates varied by region and the type of pump flow, with survival at 12 and 48 months (axial flow vs centrifugal flow) being 82% vs 82% and 52% vs 53 in Americas; 92% vs 86% and 83% vs 74% in Asia-Pacific; and 80% vs 75% and 69% vs 53% in Europe, respectively (regional survival p < 0.0001).
CONCLUSION: There are marked global differences in LVAD recipient characteristics, device utilization, and post-operative care. These heterogeneities along with differences in patient management and transplantation rates may impact long-term survival. Regional differences in adverse event incidence warrant further investigation.