Left ventricular assist devices: bridges to transplantation, recovery, and destination for whom?

Application of mechanical cardiac support now requires consideration of a wider range of goals beyond bridging to transplantation to include destination therapy and perhaps bridging to recovery.1,2 Responsible dissemination of the technology requires identification of patient populations from which to select candidates most likely to benefit. At this early stage, benefit is most apparent against a high background mortality from end-stage heart failure. Heart failure affects an estimated 5 million patients in the United States. Of those, ≈60% have heart failure with left ventricular dilation and reduced ejection fraction. Trials demonstrating benefit of therapies for heart failure have focused primarily on mild–moderate heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, generally with annual mortality in the range of 8% to 18%.3 Advanced heart failure has been defined as symptoms limiting daily activity (New York Heart Association class III and IV) despite attempted therapy with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, β-blockers, digoxin, and diuretics,4 a description that applies to ≈300 000 to 800 000 patients in the United States. Although often labeled as “refractory,” many patients enjoy improved quality of life and decreased hospitalizations after referral to experienced heart failure centers, where aggressive medical strategies focus on relief of congestion. Surgical approaches include complex revascularization, valvular repair/replacement, or ventricular reconstruction. When technically successful, biventricular pacing can improve functional status for many of the 25% to 40% of patients with marked ventricular asynchrony.5 If early stabilization allows institution of β-adrenergic–blocking agents, prognosis is further improved.6 Dedicated heart failure management programs that facilitate patient education, compliance, and fluid balance have been integral to benefits observed with these therapies. The highest-risk heart failure populations are best identified after optimization of current therapies. Low left ventricular ejection fraction is not sufficient description of either function or prognosis once heart failure has become advanced. Neither …

[1]  G. Fonarow,et al.  Improvement in exercise capacity of candidates awaiting heart transplantation. , 1995, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[2]  K. Swedberg,et al.  Effects of enalapril on mortality in severe congestive heart failure: results of the Cooperative North Scandinavian Enalapril Survival Study (CONSENSUS). , 1988, The American journal of cardiology.

[3]  J R Wilson,et al.  Value of Peak Exercise Oxygen Consumption for Optimal Timing of Cardiac Transplantation in Ambulatory Patients With Heart Failure , 1991, Circulation.

[4]  L. Stevenson,et al.  Preferences for quality of life or survival expressed by patients with heart failure. , 2001, The Journal of heart and lung transplantation : the official publication of the International Society for Heart Transplantation.

[5]  G. Fonarow,et al.  Freedom from congestion predicts good survival despite previous class IV symptoms of heart failure. , 2000, American heart journal.

[6]  E. Antman,et al.  ACC/AHA PRACTICE GUIDELINES ACC/AHA Guidelines for the Evaluation and Management of Chronic Heart Failure in the Adult: Executive Summary , 2002 .

[7]  J T Watson,et al.  The REMATCH trial: rationale, design, and end points. Randomized Evaluation of Mechanical Assistance for the Treatment of Congestive Heart Failure. , 1999, The Annals of thoracic surgery.

[8]  M Flannery,et al.  Low incidence of myocardial recovery after left ventricular assist device implantation in patients with chronic heart failure. , 1998, Circulation.

[9]  D. DeMets,et al.  Effect of oral milrinone on mortality in severe chronic heart failure. The PROMISE Study Research Group. , 1991, The New England journal of medicine.

[10]  M C Oz,et al.  Long-term use of a left ventricular assist device for end-stage heart failure. , 2001, The New England journal of medicine.

[11]  L. Stevenson,et al.  Mechanical Cardiac Support 2000: Current applications and future trial design. , 2001, The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery.

[12]  F. Harrell,et al.  A randomized controlled trial of epoprostenol therapy for severe congestive heart failure: The Flolan International Randomized Survival Trial (FIRST). , 1997, American heart journal.

[13]  D. DeMets,et al.  Effect of carvedilol on survival in severe chronic heart failure. , 2001, The New England journal of medicine.

[14]  F. Zannad,et al.  Clinical definition and epidemiology of advanced heart failure. , 1998, American heart journal.

[15]  D. Delurgio,et al.  Cardiac resynchronization in chronic heart failure. , 2002, The New England journal of medicine.

[16]  James Fang,et al.  Development of circulatory-renal limitations to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors identifies patients with severe heart failure and early mortality. , 2003, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[17]  Milton Packer,et al.  Cardiac resynchronization in chronic heart failure. , 2002, The New England journal of medicine.

[18]  G. Couper,et al.  Target heart failure populations for newer therapies. , 1995, Circulation.

[19]  Salim Yusuf,et al.  Effect of enalapril on survival in patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fractions and congestive heart failure. , 1991, The New England journal of medicine.

[20]  B. Pitt,et al.  The effect of spironolactone on morbidity and mortality in patients with severe heart failure. Randomized Aldactone Evaluation Study Investigators. , 1999, The New England journal of medicine.

[21]  B. Pitt,et al.  The Effect of Spironolactone on Morbidity and Mortality in Patients with Severe Heart Failure , 2000 .

[22]  A. Hagège,et al.  Myoblast transplantation for heart failure , 2001, The Lancet.