Comparison of observed survival after ventricular assist device placement versus predicted survival without assist device using the seattle heart failure model

ASAIO Journal

Volumn 58, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 93-97

  Pamboukian, Salpy V ^a   Tallaj, Jose A ^a   Brown, Robert N ^b   Nielsen, Thomas ^a   George, James F ^b   Kirklin, James K ^b   Holman, William L ^b   Levy, Wayne C ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM   (United States)

^b Kentucky   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ASSIST DEVICE; HAZARD RATIO; HEART FAILURE; LEFT VENTRICULAR EJECTION FRACTION; MEAN AGES; MEDICAL MANAGEMENT; META-ANALYSIS; OPTIMAL TIMING; PHOSPHODIESTERASE INHIBITORS; POINT ESTIMATE; RENAL REPLACEMENT THERAPIES; RISK ASSESSMENT TOOL; SEATTLE; STANDARD DEVIATION; VENTRICULAR ASSIST DEVICE; Z-SCORES;

CARDIOLOGY; FIBER OPTIC SENSORS; PESTICIDE EFFECTS; TELEMEDICINE;

LEFT VENTRICULAR ASSIST DEVICES;

ARTICLE; CLASSIFICATION; COMPARATIVE STUDY; FEMALE; HEART ASSIST DEVICE; HEART FAILURE; HUMAN; KAPLAN MEIER METHOD; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MORTALITY; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; RISK ASSESSMENT;

FEMALE; HEART FAILURE; HEART-ASSIST DEVICES; HUMANS; KAPLAN-MEIER ESTIMATE; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; RISK ASSESSMENT;

EID: 84858151049     PISSN: 10582916     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/MAT.0b013e31824450f9     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Johnson MR, Meyer KH, Haft J, Kinder D, Webber SA, Dyke DB: Heart transplantation in the United States, 1999-2008. Am J Transplant 10:1035-1046, 2010.
2. Miller LW, Pagani FD, Russell SD, et al; HeartMate II Clinical Investigators: Use of a continuous-flow device in patients awaiting heart transplantation. N Engl J Med 357: 885-896, 2007.
3. Rose EA, Gelijns AC, Moskowitz AJ, et al; Randomized Evaluation of Mechanical Assistance for the Treatment of Congestive Heart Failure (REMATCH) Study Group: Long-term use of a left ventricular assist device for end-stage heart failure. N Engl J Med 345: 1435-1443, 2001.
4. Slaughter MS, Rogers JG, Milano CA, et al; HeartMate II Investigators: Advanced heart failure treated with continuousflow left ventricular assist device. N Engl J Med 361: 2241-2251, 2009.
5. Pagani FD, Miller LW, Russell SD, et al; HeartMate II Investigators: Extended mechanical circulatory support with a continuousflow rotary left ventricular assist device. J Am Coll Cardiol 54: 312-321, 2009.
6. Levy WC, Mozaffarian D, Linker DT, et al: The Seattle Heart Failure Model: Prediction of survival in heart failure. Circulation 113: 1424-1433, 2006.
7. Levy WC, Mozaffarian D, Linker DT, Farrar DJ, Miller LW; REMATCH Investigators: Can the Seattle heart failure model be used to risk-stratify heart failure patients for potential left ventricular assist device therapy? J Heart Lung Transplant 28: 231-236, 2009.
8. Thackray S, Easthaugh J, Freemantle N, Cleland JG: The effectiveness and relative effectiveness of intravenous inotropic drugs acting through the adrenergic pathway in patients with heart failure-a meta-regression analysis. Eur J Heart Fail 4: 515-529, 2002.
9. Smits JM, Deng MC, Hummel M, et al; Comparative Outcome and Clinical Profiles in Transplantation (COCPIT) Study Group: A prognostic model for predicting waiting-list mortality for a total national cohort of adult heart-transplant candidates. Transplantation 76: 1185-1189, 2003.
10. Hunt SA, Abraham WT, Chin MH, et al; 2009 focused update incorporated into the ACC/AHA 2005 guidelines for the diagnosis and management of heart failure in adults: A report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on practice guidelines developed in collaboration with the International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation. J Am Coll Cardiol 53:e1-90, 2009.
11. Stevenson LW, Pagani FD, Young JB, et al: INTERMACS profiles of advanced heart failure: The current picture. J Heart Lung Transplant 28: 535-541, 2009.
12. Kirklin JK, Naftel DC, Stevenson LW, et al: INTERMACS database for durable devices for circulatory support: First annual report. J Heart Lung Transplant 27: 1065-1072, 2008.
13. Alba AC, Rao V, Ivanov J, Ross HJ, Delgado DH: Usefulness of the INTERMACS scale to predict outcomes after mechanical assist device implantation. J Heart Lung Transplant 28: 827-833, 2009.
14. Farrar, DJ: Preoperative predictors of survival in patients with Thoratec ventricular assist devices as a bridge to heart transplantation. Thoratec Ventricular Assist Device Principal Investigators. J Heart Lung Transplant 13: 93-100, 1994; discussion 100-101.
15. Oz MC, Goldstein DJ, Pepino P, et al: Screening scale predicts patients successfully receiving long-term implantable left ventricular assist devices. Circulation 92 ( Suppl 9): II169-173, 1995.
16. Rao V, Oz MC, Flannery MA, Catanese KA, Argenziano M, Naka Y: Revised screening scale to predict survival after insertion of a left ventricular assist device. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 125: 855-862, 2003.
17. Lietz K, Long JW, Kfoury AG, et al: Outcomes of left ventricular assist device implantation as destination therapy in the post- REMATCH era: Implications for patient selection. Circulation 116: 497-505, 2007.
18. Schaffer JM, Allen JG, Weiss ES, et al: Evaluation of risk indices in continuous-flow left ventricular assist device patients. Ann Thorac Surg 88: 1889-1896, 2009.
19. Vazquez R, Bayes-Genis A, Cygankiewicz I, et al; MUSIC Investigators: The MUSIC Risk score: A simple method for predicting mortality in ambulatory patients with chronic heart failure. Eur Heart J 30: 1088-1096, 2009.
20. Pocock SJ, Wang D, Pfeffer MA, et al: Predictors of mortality and morbidity in patients with chronic heart failure. Eur Heart J 27: 65-75, 2006.
21. Kormos RL, Teuteberg JJ, Pagani FD, et al; HeartMate II Clinical Investigators: Right ventricular failure in patients with the HeartMate II continuous-flow left ventricular assist device: Incidence, risk factors, and effect on outcomes. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 139: 1316-1324, 2010