Clinical effectiveness of therapy with continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices in nonischemic versus ischemic cardiomyopathy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract

Background: Clinicians may be less inclined to consider long-term left ventricular assist device (LVAD) therapy in end-stage heart failure (ESHF) as a result of nonischemic cardiomyopathy (NICM) versus ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM) owing to potentially greater right ventricular involvement in the former; however, it is unknown whether the cause of heart failure has a clinically meaningful effect on outcomes following LVAD implantation. In this systematic review, we aimed to determine whether ischemic versus nonischemic etiology has any impact on patient-relevant outcomes. Methods: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed and the Cochrane Library for studies published in English between Jan. 1, 2000, and Nov. 22, 2018, that examined survival and transplantation rates following LVAD implantation in patients with NICM or ICM. Randomized clinical trials, cohort studies, case–control studies, cross-sectional studies and case series with a sample size of at least 8 patients were eligible for inclusion. To be included in the meta-analysis, outcomes had to include at least death reported at 30 days or 1 year after LVAD implantation. Quality of included studies was assessed by 2 independent reviewers using the Newcastle–Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale for Cohort Studies. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) quality-assessment tool was used to assess outcomes (30-d survival, 1-yr survival and cardiac transplantation following LVAD therapy) across studies. Results: From a total of 2843 citations identified, 7 studies met all inclusion criteria. Studies were generally of good quality, but reporting of patient demographic characteristics, outcomes and complications was heterogeneous. We found no significant difference in 30-day or 1-year survival or in cardiac transplantation rates after device implantation between the NICM and ICM groups. Patients in the 2 groups had similar outcomes up to 1 year with LVAD therapy. Conclusion: Early outcomes of LVAD therapy do not appear to be affected by heart failure etiology. Ongoing investigation is required to determine the long-term outcomes of LVAD therapy in ICM and NICM. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO register, record ID 76483

Pectus Excavatum and Risk of Right Ventricular Failure in Left Ventricular Assist Device Patients

“…A possible explanation for this finding could be the significantly higher prevalence of ischemic heart disease as the primary diagnosis in the normal chest-wall group, indicating a higher prevalence of systemic arterial vascular disease and increased frailty. However, this hypothesis has previously been investigated, and no differences were found in outcomes when comparing ischemic heart failure to non-ischemic heart failure in previous studies [ 32 ]. Further research is needed to identify other factors that may contribute to differences in overall unplanned hospital readmission rates.…”