Survival on the Heart Transplant Waiting List

Abstract

IMPORTANCE With continuing improvements in medical devices and more than a decade since the 2006 United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) allocation policy, it is pertinent to assess survival among patients on the heart transplantation waiting list, especially given the recently approved 2018 UNOS allocation policy.OBJECTIVES To assess survival outcomes among patients on the heart transplant waiting list during the past 3 decades and to examine the association of ventricular assist devices (VADs) and the 2006 UNOS allocation policy with survival. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTSA retrospective cross-sectional used the UNOS database to perform an analysis of 95 323 candidates wait-listed for heart transplantation between January 1, 1987, and December 29, 2017. Candidates for all types of combined transplants were excluded (n = 2087). Patients were followed up from the time of listing to death, transplantation, or removal from the list due to clinical improvement. Competing-risk, Kaplan-Meier, and multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression analyses were used. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESThe analysis involved an unadjusted and adjusted survival analysis in which the primary outcome was death on the waiting list. Because of changing waiting list preferences and policies during the study period, the intrinsic risk of death for wait-listed candidates was assessed by individually analyzing, comparing, and adjusting for several candidate risk factors. RESULTSIn total, 95 323 candidates (72 915 men [76.5%]; mean [SD] age, 51.9 [12.0] years) were studied. In the setting of changes in listing preferences, 1-year survival on the waiting list increased from 34.1% in 1987-1990 to 67.8% in 2011-2017 (difference in proportions, 0.34%; 95% CI, 0.32%-0.36%; P < .001). The 1-year waiting list survival for candidates with VADs increased from 10.2% in 1996-2000 to 70.0% in 2011-2017 (difference in proportions, 0.60%; 95% CI, 0.58%-0.62%; P < .001). Similarly, in the setting of changing mechanical circulatory support indications, the 1-year waiting list survival for patients without VADs increased from 53.9% in 1996-2000 to 66.5% in 2011-2017 (difference in proportions, 0.13%; 95% CI, 0.12%-0.14%; P < .001). In the decade prior to the 2006 UNOS allocation policy, the 1-year waiting list survival was 51.1%, while in the decade after it was 63.9% (difference in proportions, 0.13%; 95% CI, 0.12%-0.14%; P < .001). In adjusted analysis, each time period after 1987-1990 had a marked decrease in waiting list mortality.CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE This study found temporally associated increases in heart transplant waiting list survival for all patient groups (with or without VADs, UNOS status 1 and status 2 candidates, and candidates with poor functional status).

Association between implantable cardioverter-defibrillator and survival in patients awaiting heart transplantation: A meta-analysis and systematic review

“…During this time, there was a significant increase in 1-year survival on the HT waiting list from 34.1% in 1987-1990 to 67.8% in 2011-2017. 25 While this finding correlates with a definite increase in ICD implantation over this time period, the decrease in waitlist mortality is likely also contributed by improvement in heart failure management with the introduction of temporary MCS and the evolution of LVADs. 26,27 As mentioned previously, early studies of ICD use in HT candidates only showed a survival benefit in patients implanted for secondary prevention.…”

Heart Transplant in Older Adults

“…A final consideration during the pre-transplant period is the donor. Donor organs remain scarce and HT waitlist mortality remains significant [ 40 ]. This organ scarcity and ethical concerns about allocating organs to older recipients is reflected in the 2016 ISHLT Listing Criteria for HT which specify that for carefully selected patients over 70 years of age who are considered for HT, an alternate-type program be considered [ 25 ].…”

Commentary: The downstream effects of thoracic multiorgan donation

“…Transplant programs have looked to extend donor organ utilization using novel means to rehabilitate organs both before and after procurement. 1,2 For suitable donors, procurement of multiple organs is an invaluable way to increase the number of potential recipients who may benefit from a single donor. The technique of procurement of an isolated heart differs from the technique of procurement of both heart and lungs, and little comparative data have been published regarding the longand short-term outcomes after transplantation of a heart from an isolated heart (IH) donor versus a combined heart-lung (CHL) donor.…”