Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2018 Feb 1;178(2):204-209.
doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2017.4831.

Outcomes Associated With Left Ventricular Assist Devices Among Recipients With and Without End-stage Renal Disease

Affiliations

Outcomes Associated With Left Ventricular Assist Devices Among Recipients With and Without End-stage Renal Disease

Nisha Bansal et al. JAMA Intern Med. .

Abstract

Importance: Left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) are widely used both as a bridge to heart transplant and as destination therapy in advanced heart failure. Although heart failure is common in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD), little is known about outcomes after LVAD implantation in this population.

Objective: To determine the utilization of and outcomes associated with LVADs in nationally representative cohorts of patients with and without ESRD.

Design, setting and participants: We described LVAD utilization and outcomes among Medicare beneficiaries after ESRD onset (defined as having received maintenance dialysis or a kidney transplant) from 2003 to 2013 based on Medicare claims linked to data from the United States Renal Data System (USRDS), a national registry for ESRD. We compared Medicare beneficiaries with ESRD to a 5% sample of Medicare beneficiaries without ESRD.

Exposures: ESRD (vs no ESRD) among patients who underwent LVAD placement.

Main outcomes and measures: The primary outcome was survival after LVAD placement.

Results: Among the patients with ESRD, the mean age was 58.4 (12.1) years and 62.0% (96) were male. Among those without ESRD, the mean age was 62.2 (12.6) years and 75.1% (196) were male. From 2003 to 2013, 155 Medicare beneficiaries with ESRD (median and interquartile range [IQR] days from ESRD onset to LVAD placement were 1655 days [453-3050 days]) and 261 beneficiaries without ESRD in the Medicare 5% sample received an LVAD. During a median follow-up of 762 days (IQR, 92-3850 days), 127 patients (81.9%) with and 95 (36.4%) without ESRD died. more than half of patients with ESRD (80 [51.6%]) compared with 11 (4%) of those without ESRD died during the index hospitalization. The median time to death was 16 days (IQR 2-447 days) for patients with ESRD compared with 2125 days (IQR, 565-3850 days) for those without ESRD. With adjustment for demographics, comorbidity and time period, patients with ESRD had a markedly increased adjusted risk of death (hazard ratio, 36.3; 95% CI, 15.6-84.5), especially in the first 60 days after LVAD placement.

Conclusions and relevance: Patients with ESRD at the time of LVAD placement had an extremely poor prognosis, with most surviving for less than 3 weeks. This information may be crucial in supporting shared decision-making around treatments for advanced heart failure for patients with ESRD.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: None reported.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.. Derivation of Study Cohorts With and Without End-stage Renal Disease (ESRD)
A, Left ventricular assist device (LVAD) recipients with ESRD. B, Left ventricular assist device (LVAD) recipients without ESRD. HMO indicates health maintenance organization; ICD-9, International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9); USRD, United States Renal Data System.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.. Kaplan-Meier Curves for Survival After LVAD Placement
ESRD indicates end-stage renal disease; LVAD, left ventricular assist device.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.. Outcomes Among Left Ventricular Assist Device Recipients With and Without End-stage Renal Disease (ESRD)

Comment in

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. 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. 2001;345(20):1435-1443. - PubMed
    1. 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. 2007;357(9):885-896. - PubMed
    1. Slaughter MS, Rogers JG, Milano CA, et al. ; HeartMate II Investigators . Advanced heart failure treated with continuous-flow left ventricular assist device. N Engl J Med. 2009;361(23):2241-2251. - PubMed
    1. Zannad F, Mebazaa A, Juillière Y, et al. ; EFICA Investigators . Clinical profile, contemporary management and one-year mortality in patients with severe acute heart failure syndromes: the EFICA study. Eur J Heart Fail. 2006;8(7):697-705. - PubMed
    1. Shah N, Agarwal V, Patel N, et al. . National trends in utilization, mortality, complications, and cost of care after left ventricular assist device implantation from 2005 to 2011. Ann Thorac Surg. 2016;101(4):1477-1484. - PubMed

Publication types