Abstract 107: Predictors and Frequency of ICD Implantation for Primary Prevention in ICD Eligible Patients: Results from a Prospective Multicenter Registry

2012 ◽  
Vol 5 (suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rory Hachamovitch ◽  
Benjamin Nutter ◽  
Manuel D Cerqueira ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Primary Prevention ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Myocardial Imaging ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Study Cohort ◽  
Icd Implantation ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Multicenter Registry

Background . The use of implantable cardiac defibrillators has been associated with improved survival in several well-defined patient (pt) subsets. Its utilization for primary prevention in eligible pts, however, is unclear. We sought to examine the frequency of ICD implantation (ICD-IMP) for primary prevention in a cohort prospectively enrolled in a prospective, multicenter registry of ICD candidates. Methods . We identified 961 pts enrolled in the AdreView Myocardial Imaging for Risk Evaluation in Heart Failure (ADMIRE-HF) study, a prospective, multicenter study evaluating the prognostic usefulness of 123I-mIBG scintigraphy in a heart failure population. Inclusion criteria limited patients to those meeting guideline criteria for ICD implantation; these criteria included left ventricular ejection fraction ≤35% and New York Heart Association functional class II-III. We excluded pts with an ICD at the time of enrollment, leaving a study cohort of 934 patients. Pts were followed up for 24 months after enrollment. Pts undergoing ICD-IMP after enrollment for secondary prevention were censored at the time of intervention. The association between ICD-IMP utilization and demographic, clinical, laboratory, and imaging data was examined using Cox proportional hazards analysis (CPH). Results . Of 934 pts, 196 (21%) were referred for ICD-IMP over a mean follow-up of 612±242 days. Implantations occurred 167±164 days after enrollment. Patients referred for ICD were younger (61±12 vs. 63±12), but did not differ with respect to proportion female (17% vs. 21%), African-American race (12% vs. 15%), diabetics (37% vs. 36%) (All p=NS). The frequency of ICD-IMP did not differ as a function of age, race, sex, LVEF, or imaging result (All p=NS). CPH revealed that a model including age, race, sex, diabetes, smoking, BMI, NYHA class, hypertension, heart failure etiology, and prior MI identified none of these as predictive of ICD-IMP. Conclusion: This analysis of prospective registry data reveals that in patients who are guideline-defined candidates for ICD-IMP, only about one in five receive an ICD over a two year follow-up interval. Multivariable modeling failed to identify any factor associated with ICD use.

Abstract 16238: Mortality and Predictors of Appropriate ICD Therapy in Japanese Primary Prevention Patients: A 13-year Experience Based on the MADIT2 Criteria

Circulation ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 130 (suppl_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yoshimori An ◽  
Kenji Ando ◽  
Michio Nagashima ◽  
Masato Fukunaga ◽  
Kenichi Hiroshima ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Prevention ◽  
Cox Regression ◽  
Biventricular Pacing ◽  
Nyha Class ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Icd Implantation ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Icd Therapy

Background: There are still limited data on the mortality for a long-term follow-up and the clinical factors influencing appropriate therapies in Japanese patients with implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) for primary prevention, who satisfied the criteria in Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial 2 (MADIT2). Methods: Between January 2000 and December 2012, a total of 436 patients without prior ventricular arrhythmic event underwent ICD implantation for primary prevention at our institution. Among these patients, we enrolled consecutive 122 patients (69±10 years, male: 84%, biventricular-pacing: 54%, median follow-up: 1390 days) who met the MADIT2 criteria; left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤30% with ischemic heart disease, more than 4 weeks after myocardial infarction. Results: At the 3 years of follow-up, the mortality rate (21%) was comparable with that of the original MADIT2 ICD group (20%). The Kaplan-Meier event rate for appropriate ICD therapy (shock and anti-tachycardia pacing therapy) (35%) was also similar to that of the original MADIT2 ICD group (32%). Multivariate analysis by Cox regression model revealed that left ventricular diastolic diameter (LVDd) ≥60mm (Hazard Ratio [HR]: 1.65, 95% Confidence Interval [CI]: 1.16-2.14, P=0.004) and non-sustained ventricular tachycardia (NSVT) (HR: 1.55, 95%CI: 1.13-2.15, P=0.007) were independent predictors for appropriate ICD therapy. On the other hand, LVEF, NYHA class, biventricular-pacing, amiodarone or inducibility of ventricular arrhythmia was not associated with appropriate ICD therapy. Conclusion: Appropriate ICD therapy was delivered in Japanese primary prevention patients as often as in the original MADIT2 ICD group and strongly predicted by dilated left ventricle and NSVT.

scholarly journals 254 Impact of sacubitril/valsartan on implantable defibrillator eligibility in heart failure: a real-world experience

2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (Supplement_G) ◽  
Author(s):  
Luca Monzo ◽  
Ilaria Ferrari ◽  
Carlo Gaudio ◽  
Francesco Cicogna ◽  
Claudia Tota ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Primary Prevention ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Nyha Class ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Reverse Remodelling ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Aims Current guidelines recommend an implantable cardiac defibrillator (ICD) in patients with symptomatic heart failure and reduced ejection fraction [HFrEF; left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤35%] despite ≥3 months of optimal medical therapy. Recent observations demonstrated that sacubitril/valsartan induces beneficial reverse cardiac remodelling in eligible HFrEF patients. Given the pivotal role of LVEF in the selection of ICD candidates, we sought to assess the impact of sacubitril/valsartan on ICD eligibility and its predictors in HFrEF patients. Methods and results We retrospectively evaluated 48 chronic HFrEF patients receiving sacubitril/valsartan and previously implanted with an ICD in primary prevention. We assumed that ICD was no longer necessary if LVEF improved >35% (or > 30% in asymptomatics) at follow-up. Over a median follow-up of 11 months, sacubitril/valsartan induced a significant drop in LV end-systolic volume (−16.7 ml/m2, P = 0.023) and diameter (−6.8 mm, P = 0.022), resulting in a significant increase in LVEF (+3.9%, P < 0.001). As a consequence, 40% of previously implanted patients resulted no more eligible for ICD at follow-up. NYHA class improved in the 50% of population. A dose-dependent effect was noted, with higher doses associated to more reverse remodelling. Among patients deemed no more eligible for ICD, lower NYHA class [odds ratio (OR): 3.73 (95% CI: 1.05–13.24), P = 0.041], better LVEF [OR: 1.23 (95% CI: 1.01–1.48), P = 0.032], and the treatment with the intermediate or high dose of sacubitril/valsartan [OR: 5.60 (1.15–27.1), P = 0.032] were the most important predictors of status change. Conclusions In symptomatic HFrEF patients, sacubitril/valsartan induced beneficial cardiac reverse remodelling and improved NYHA class. These effects resulted in a significant reduction of patients deemed eligible for ICD in primary prevention.

scholarly journals Mortality and readmission in non-ischemic compared with ischemic cardiomyopathies after implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implantation

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
J Freeman ◽  
J Bjerre ◽  
C Parzynski ◽  
K Minges ◽  
T Ahmad ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Primary Prevention ◽  
Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator ◽  
The United States ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Icd Implantation ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Cardioverter Defibrillator ◽  
Risk Of Death

Abstract Background/Introduction Uncertainty remains regarding the benefit of primary prevention ICDs overall in contemporary practice, and particularly in those with NICM compared with ICM. Purpose To evaluate the contemporary risk of death and readmission following following implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implantation in patients with non-ischemic cardiomyopathies (NICM) compared with ischemic cardiomyopathies (ICM) in a large nationally representative cohort in the United States. Methods We used data from the American College of Cardiology (ACC) National Cardiovascular Data Registry (NCDR) ICD Registry linked with Medicare claims from April 1, 2010 to December 31, 2013 to establish a cohort of NICM and ICM patients with a left ventricular ejection fraction ≤35% who received a de novo, primary prevention ICD. We compared mortality, all-cause readmission, and heart failure readmission using Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazard regressions models. We also evaluated temporal trends in mortality. Results Among 31,044 NICM and 68,458 ICM patients with a median follow up of 2.4 years, one-year mortality was significantly higher in ICM patients (12.3%) compared with NICM (7.9%, p<0.001). The higher mortality in ICM patients remained significant after adjustment for covariates (hazard ratio (HR) 1.40; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.36 to 1.45), and was consistent in subgroup analyses. These findings were consistent across the duration of the study. ICM patients were also significantly more likely to be readmitted for all causes (adjusted HR 1.15, CI 1.12 to 1.18) and for heart failure (adjusted HR 1.25, CI 1.21 to 1.31). Conclusions The risks of mortality and hospital readmission after primary prevention ICD implantation were significantly higher in patients with ICM compared with NICM, and these findings were consistent across all patient subgroups tested and over the duration of the study. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None

scholarly journals Biomarkers-based personalized follow-up in chronic heart failure improves patient’s outcomes and reduces care associate cost

2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonio Leon-Justel ◽  
Jose I. Morgado Garcia-Polavieja ◽  
Ana Isabel Alvarez-Rios ◽  
Francisco Jose Caro Fernandez ◽  
Pedro Agustin Pajaro Merino ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Hospital Admissions ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Secondary Outcome ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Ed Visits ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background Heart failure (HF) is a major and growing medical and economic problem, with high prevalence and incidence rates worldwide. Cardiac Biomarker is emerging as a novel tool for improving management of patients with HF with a reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (HFrEF). Methods This is a before and after interventional study, that assesses the impact of a personalized follow-up procedure for HF on patient’s outcomes and care associated cost, based on a clinical model of risk stratification and personalized management according to that risk. A total of 192 patients were enrolled and studied before the intervention and again after the intervention. The primary objective was the rate of readmissions, due to a HF. Secondary outcome compared the rate of ED visits and quality of life improvement assessed by the number of patients who had reduced NYHA score. A cost-analysis was also performed on these data. Results Admission rates significantly decreased by 19.8% after the intervention (from 30.2 to 10.4), the total hospital admissions were reduced by 32 (from 78 to 46) and the total length of stay was reduced by 7 days (from 15 to 9 days). The rate of ED visits was reduced by 44% (from 64 to 20). Thirty-one percent of patients had an improved functional class score after the intervention, whereas only 7.8% got worse. The overall cost saving associated with the intervention was € 72,769 per patient (from € 201,189 to € 128,420) and €139,717.65 for the whole group over 1 year. Conclusions A personalized follow-up of HF patients led to important outcome benefits and resulted in cost savings, mainly due to the reduction of patient hospitalization readmissions and a significant reduction of care-associated costs, suggesting that greater attention should be given to this high-risk cohort to minimize the risk of hospitalization readmissions.

scholarly journals Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Ischemic versus Non-Ischemic Cardiomyopathy after Angiotensin-Neprilysin Inhibition Therapy

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (21) ◽  
pp. 4989
Author(s):  
Mohammad Abumayyaleh ◽  
Christina Pilsinger ◽  
Ibrahim El-Battrawy ◽  
Marvin Kummer ◽  
Jürgen Kuschyk ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Ischemic Cardiomyopathy ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Ventricular Tachyarrhythmias ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
One Year ◽  
The Impact

Background: The angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) decreases cardiovascular mortality in patients with chronic heart failure with a reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Data regarding the impact of ARNI on the outcome in HFrEF patients according to heart failure etiology are limited. Methods and results: One hundred twenty-one consecutive patients with HFrEF from the years 2016 to 2017 were included at the Medical Centre Mannheim Heidelberg University and treated with ARNI according to the current guidelines. Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was numerically improved during the treatment with ARNI in both patient groups, that with ischemic cardiomyopathy (n = 61) (ICMP), and that with non-ischemic cardiomyopathy (n = 60) (NICMP); p = 0.25. Consistent with this data, the NT-proBNP decreased in both groups, more commonly in the NICMP patient group. In addition, the glomerular filtration rate (GFR) and creatinine changed before and after the treatment with ARNI in both groups. In a one-year follow-up, the rate of ventricular tachyarrhythmias (ventricular tachycardia and ventricular fibrillation) tended to be higher in the ICMP group compared with the NICMP group (ICMP 38.71% vs. NICMP 17.24%; p = 0.07). The rate of one-year all-cause mortality was similar in both groups (ICMP 6.5% vs. NICMP 6.6%; log-rank = 0.9947). Conclusions: This study shows that, although the treatment with ARNI improves the LVEF in ICMP and NICMP patients, the risk of ventricular tachyarrhythmias remains higher in ICMP patients in comparison with NICMP patients. Renal function is improved in the NICMP group after the treatment. Long-term mortality is similar over a one-year follow-up.

Abstract P232: Screening Past B-Type Natriuretic Peptide (BNP) Values to Identify Candidates for Treatment of Systolic Dysfunction

2011 ◽  
Vol 4 (suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Parisa Gholami ◽  
Shoutzu Lin ◽  
Paul Heidenreich
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
The Mean

Background: BNP testing is now common though it is not clear if the test results are used to improve patient care. A high BNP may be an indicator that the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) is low (<40%) such that the patient will benefit from life-prolonging therapy. Objective: To determine how often clinicians obtained a measure of LVEF (echocardiography, nuclear) following a high BNP value when the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was not known to be low (<40%). Methods and Results: We reviewed the medical records of 296 consecutive patients (inpatient or outpatient) with a BNP values of at least 200 pg/ml at a single medical center (tertiary hospital with 8 community clinics). A prior diagnosis of heart failure was made in 65%, while 42% had diabetes, 79% had hypertension, 59% had ischemic heart disease and 31% had chronic lung disease. The mean age was 73 ± 12 years, 75% were white, 10% black, 15% other and the mean BNP was 810 ± 814 pg/ml. The LVEF was known to be < 40% in 84 patients (28%, mean BNP value of 1094 ± 969 pg/ml). Of the remaining 212 patients without a known low LVEF, 161 (76%) had a prior LVEF >=40% ( mean BNP value of 673 ± 635 pg/ml), and 51 (24%) had no prior LVEF documented (mean BNP 775 ± 926 pg/ml). Following the high BNP, a measure of LVEF was obtained (including outside studies documented by the primary care provider) within 6 months in only 53% (113 of 212) of those with an LVEF not known to be low. Of those with a follow-up echocardiogram, the LVEF was <40% in 18/113 (16%) and >=40% in 95/113 (84%). There was no significant difference in mean initial BNP values between those with a follow-up LVEF <40% (872 ± 940pg/ml), >=40% (704 ± 737 pg/ml), or not done (661 ± 649 pg/ml, p=0.5). Conclusions: Follow-up measures of LVEF did not occur in almost 50% of patients with a high BNP where the information may have led to institution of life-prolonging therapy. Of those that did have a follow-up study a new diagnosis of depressesd LVEF was noted in 16%. Screening of existing BNP and LVEF data and may be an efficient strategy to identify patients that may benefit from life-prolonging therapy for heart failure.

Predicting mortality for patients with heart failure beyond oxygen consumption: a prognostic risk score

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hanaa Shafiek ◽  
Andres Grau ◽  
Jaume Pons ◽  
Pere Pericas ◽  
Xavier Rossello ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Chronic Heart Failure ◽  
Risk Score ◽  
Cardiac Transplantation ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Functional Evaluation ◽  
Cardiac Events ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction

Background: Cardiopulmonary exercise test (CPET) is a crucial tool for the functional evaluation of cardiac patients. We hypothesized that VO2 max and VE/VCO2 slope are not the only parameters of CPET able to predict major cardiac events (mortality or cardiac transplantation urgently or elective). Objectives: We aimed to identify the best CPET predictors of major cardiac events in patients with severe chronic heart failure and to propose an integrated score that could be applied for their prognostic evaluation. Methods: We evaluated 140 patients with chronic heart failure who underwent CPET between 2011 and 2019. Major cardiac events were evaluated during follow-up. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis were applied to study the predictive value of different clinical, echocardiographic and CPET parameters in relation to the major cardiac events. A score was generated and c-statistic was used for the comparisons. Results: Thirty-nine patients (27.9%) died or underwent cardiac transplantation over a median follow-up of 48 months. Five parameters (maximal workload, breathing reserve, left ventricular ejection fraction, diastolic dysfunction and non-idiopathic cardiomyopathy) were used to generate a risk score that had better risk discrimination than NYHA dyspnea scale, VO2 max, VE/VCO2 slope > 35 alone, and combined VO2 max and VE/VCO2 slope (p= 0.009, 0.004, < 0.001 and 0.005 respectively) in predicting major cardiac events. Conclusions: A composite score of CPET and clinical/echocardiographic data is more reliable than the single use of VO2max or combined with VE/VCO2 slope to predict major cardiac events.

The Relationship Between N-Terminal Pro-Brain Natriuretic Peptide Level and Myocardial Performance Index and Their Prognostic Importances in Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction in Short Term Follow-up

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 12-17
Author(s):  
Mehmet Küçükosmanoğlu ◽  
Cihan Örem
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Prognostic Significance ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Ejection Time ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
The Mean ◽  
The Relationship

Introduction: MPI is an echocardiographic parameter that exibit the left ventricular functions globally. NT-proBNP  is an important both diagnostic and prognostic factor in heart failure. In this study, we aimed to investigate the prognostic significance of serum NT-proBNP levels and MPI in patients with STEMI. Method: Totally 104 patients with a diagnosis of STEMI were included in the study. Patients followed for 30-days and questioned for presence of symptoms of heart failure (HF) and cardiac death. Patients were invited for outpatient control after 30-days and were divided into two groups: (HF (+) group) and (HF (-) group). Results: Totally 104 patients with STEMI were hospitalized in the coronary intensive care unit. Of those patients, 17 were female (16%), 87 were male (84%), and the mean age of the patients was 58.9±10.8 years. During the 30-day follow-up, 28 (27%) of 104 patients developed HF. The mean age, hypertension ratio and anterior STEMI rate were significantly higher in the HF (+) group compared to the HF (-) group. Ejection time (ET) and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) were significantly lower and MPI was significantly higher in the HF (+) group. When the values on day first and  sixth were compared, NT-ProBNP levels were decreased in both groups. There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of the change in MPI values on the first and sixth days. Multiple regression analysis showed that the presence of anterior MI, first day NT-proBNP level and LVEF were independently associated with development of HF and death. Conclusion: In our study, NT-proBNP levels were found to be positively associated with MPI in patients with acute STEMI. It was concluded that the level of NT-proBNP detected especially on the 1st day was more valuable than MPI in determining HF development and prognosis after STEMI.  

Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction Recovery in Patients with Heart Failure and Reduced Ejection Fraction Treated with Sacubitril/Valsartan

Cardiology ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 145 (5) ◽  
pp. 275-282 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pablo Díez-Villanueva ◽  
Lourdes Vicent ◽  
Francisco de la Cuerda ◽  
Alberto Esteban-Fernández ◽  
Manuel Gómez-Bueno ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Functional Class ◽  
Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Cardiac Resynchronization ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction

Background: A significant number of heart failure (HF) patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) experience ventricular function recovery during follow-up. We studied the variables associated with LVEF recovery in patients treated with sacubitril/valsartan (SV) in clinical practice. Methods: We analyzed data from a prospective and multicenter registry including 249 HF outpatients with reduced LVEF who started SV between October 2016 and March 2017. The patients were classified into 2 groups according to LVEF at the end of follow-up (>35%: group R, or ≤35%: group NR). Results: After a mean follow-up of 7 ± 0.1 months, 62 patients (24.8%) had LVEF >35%. They were older (71.3 ± 10.8 vs. 67.5 ± 12.1 years, p = 0.025), and suffered more often from hypertension (83.9 vs. 73.8%, p = 0.096) and higher blood pressure before and after SV (both, p < 0.01). They took more often high doses of beta-blockers (30.6 vs. 27.8%, p = 0.002), with a smaller proportion undergoing cardiac resynchronization therapy (14.8 vs. 29.0%, p = 0.028) and fewer implanted cardioverter defibrillators (ICD; 32.8 vs. 67.9%, p < 0.001), this being the only predictive variable of NR in the multivariate analysis (OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.13–0.47, p < 0.0001). At the end of follow-up, the mean LVEF in group R was 41.9 ± 8.1% (vs. 26.3 ± 4.7% in group NR, p < 0.001), with an improvement compared with the initial LVEF of 14.6 ± 10.8% (vs. 0.8 ± 4.5% in group NR, p < 0.0001). Functional class improved in both groups, mainly in group R (p = 0.035), with fewer visits to the emergency department (11.5 vs. 21.6%, p = 0.07). Conclusions: In patients with LVEF ≤35% treated with SV, not carrying an ICD was independently associated with LVEF recovery, which was related to greater improvement in functional class.

scholarly journals Differences in the prognoses of patients referred to an advanced heart failure center from hospitals with different bed volumes

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Koichi Narita ◽  
Eisuke Amiya ◽  
Masaru Hatano ◽  
Junichi Ishida ◽  
Hisataka Maki ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Cox Proportional Hazards ◽  
Advanced Heart Failure ◽  
Ventricular Assist Devices ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Left Ventricular Assist Devices ◽  
Ventricular Ejection Fraction

AbstractFew reports have discussed appropriate strategies for patient referrals to advanced heart failure (HF) centers with available left ventricular assist devices (LVADs). We examined the association between the characteristics and prognoses of referred patients with advanced HF and the bed volume of the referring hospitals. This retrospective analysis evaluated 186 patients with advanced HF referred to our center for consultation about the indication of LVAD between January 1, 2015, and August 31, 2018. We divided the patients into two groups according to the bed volume of their referring hospital (high bed volume hospitals (HBHs): ≥ 500 beds in the hospital; low bed volume hospitals (LBHs): < 500 beds). We compared the primary outcome measure, a composite of LVAD implantation and all-cause death, between the patients referred from HBHs and patients referred from LBHs. The 186 patients with advanced HF referred to our hospital, who were referred from 130 hospitals (87 from LBHs and 99 from HBHs), had a mean age of 43.0 ± 12.6 years and a median left ventricular ejection fraction of 22% [15–33%]. The median follow-up duration of the patients was 583 days (119–965 days), and the primary outcome occurred during follow-up in 42 patients (43%) in the HBH group and 20 patients (23%) in the LBH group. Patients referred from HBHs tended to require catecholamine infusion on transfer more often than those referred from LBLs (36.5% (HBH), 20.2% (LBL), P = 0.021). Kaplan–Meier analysis indicates that the occurrence of the primary outcome was significantly higher in the HBH patients than in the LBH patients (log-rank P = 0.0022). Multivariate Cox proportional hazards analysis revealed that catecholamine support on transfer and long disease duration were statistically significant predictors of the primary outcome. Patients from HBHs had a greater risk of the primary outcome. However, the multivariate analysis did not indicate an association between referral from an HBH and the primary outcome. In contrast, catecholamine support on transfer, long duration of disease, and low blood pressure were independent predictors of the primary outcome. Therefore, these should be considered when determining the timing of a referral to an advanced HF center, irrespective of the bed volume of the referring hospital.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document