Veno-arterial ECMO ventricular assistance as a direct bridge to heart transplant: A single center experience in a low-middle income country.
cardiogenic shock
extracorporeal membrane oxygenation
heart transplant
ventricular assist devices
Journal
Clinical transplantation
ISSN: 1399-0012
Titre abrégé: Clin Transplant
Pays: Denmark
ID NLM: 8710240
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jun 2024
Jun 2024
Historique:
revised:
16
04
2024
received:
03
12
2023
accepted:
26
04
2024
medline:
12
6
2024
pubmed:
12
6
2024
entrez:
12
6
2024
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The use of veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) as a direct bridge to heart transplantation (BTT) is not common in adults worldwide. BTT with ECMO is associated with increased early/mid-term mortality compared with other interventions. In low- and middle-income countries (LMIC), where no other type of short-term mechanical circulatory support is available, its use is widespread and increasingly used as rescue therapy in patients with cardiogenic shock (CS) as a direct bridge to heart transplantation (HT). To assess the outcomes of adult patients using VA-ECMO as a direct BTT in an LMIC and compare them with international registries. We conducted a single-center study analyzing consecutive adult patients requiring VA-ECMO as BTT due to refractory CS or cardiac arrest (CA) in a cardiovascular center in Argentina between January 2014 and December 2022. Survival and adverse clinical events after VA-ECMO implantation were evaluated. Of 86 VA-ECMO, 22 (25.5%) were implanted as initial BTT strategy, and 52.1% of them underwent HT. Mean age was 46 years (SD 12); 59% were male. ECMO was indicated in 81% for CS, and the most common underlying condition was coronary artery disease (31.8%). Overall, in-hospital mortality for VA-ECMO as BTT was 50%. Survival to discharge was 83% in those who underwent HT and 10% in those who did not, p < .001. In those who did not undergo HT, the main cause of death was hemorrhagic complications (44%), followed by thrombotic complications (33%). The median duration of VA-ECMO was 6 days (IQR 3-16). There were no differences in the number of days on ECMO between those who received a transplant and those who did not. In the Spanish registry, in-hospital survival after HT was 66.7%; the United Network of Organ Sharing registry estimated post-transplant survival at 73.1% ± 4.4%, and in the French national registry 1-year posttransplant survival was 70% in the VA-ECMO group. In adult patients with cardiogenic shock, VA-ECMO as a direct BTT allowed successful HT in half of the patients. HT provided a survival benefit in listed patients on VA-ECMO. We present a single center experience with results comparable to those of international registries.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e15334Informations de copyright
© 2024 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Références
Masarone D, Kittleson M, Petraio A, Pacileo G. Advanced heart failure: state of the art and future directions. Rev Cardiovasc Med. 2022;23(2):48. https://doi.org/10.31083/j.rcm2302048
Guglin M, Zucker MJ, Bazan VM, et al. Venoarterial ECMO for adults: jACC scientific expert panel. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019;73(6):698‐716. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2018.11.038
Fukuhara S, Takeda K, Kurlansky PA, Naka Y, Takayama H. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation as a direct bridge to heart transplantation in adults. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2018;155(4):1607‐1618. doi:10.1016/j.jtcvs.2017.10.152
Makdisi G, Wang I‐W. Extra corporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) review of a lifesaving technology. J Thorac Dis. 2015;7(7):E166‐176. doi:10.3978/j.issn.2072‐1439.2015.07.17
Rihal CH, Naidu S, Givertz MM, Szeto WY, Burke JA, Kapur N, et al. SCAI/ACC/HFSA/STS clinical expert consensus statement on the use of percutaneous mechanical circulatory support devices in cardiovascular care. Cathet Cardiovasc Intervent. 2015;85:E175‐E196.
Peura JL, Colvin‐Adams M, Francis GS, et al. Recommendations for the use of mechanical circulatory support: device strategies and patient selection: a scientific statement from the American heart association. Circulation. 2012;126(22):2648‐2667. doi:10.1161/cir.0b013e3182769a54
Dardas TF. Temporary circulatory support devices as a bridge to transplant: boon or bane? J Heart Lung Transplant: Offic Publicat Internat Soc Heart Transplant. 2018;37(9):1045‐1046. doi:10.1016/j.healun.2018.06.001
Ouyang D, Gulati G, Ha R, Banerjee D. Incidence of temporary mechanical circulatory support before heart transplantation and impact on post‐transplant outcomes. J Heart Lung Transplant: Offic Public Internat Soc Heart Transplant. 2018;37(9):1060‐1066. doi:10.1016/j.healun.2018.04.008
Rousse N, Juthier F, Pinçon C, et al. ECMO as a bridge to decision: recovery, VAD, or heart transplantation? Int J Cardiol. 2015;187:620‐627. doi:10.1016/j.ijcard.2015.03.283
Moonsamy P, Axtell AL, Ibrahim NE, et al. Survival after heart transplantation in patients bridged with mechanical circulatory support. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2020;75(23):2892‐2905. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2020.04.037
Urban M, Siddique A, Merritt‐Genore H, Um J. What are the results of venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation bridging to heart transplantation? Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2019;29(4):632‐634. doi:10.1093/icvts/ivz096
Montisci A, Donatelli F, Cirri S, Coscioni E, Maiello C, Napoli C. Veno‐arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation as bridge to heart transplantation: the way forward. Transplant Direct. 2021;7(8):e720. doi:10.1097/txd.0000000000001172
Keebler ME, Haddad EV, Choi CW, et al. Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in cardiogenic shock. JACC Heart Fail. 2018;6:503‐516.
Lechiancole A, Maiani M, Vendramin I, Sponga S, Livi U. ECMO as Bridge to Heart Transplantation [Internet]. Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Support Therapy. IntechOpen; 2023. Available from: http://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.105765
Alonso‐Pulpón L. El trasplante cardíaco en España. Organización y resultados. Rev Esp Cardiol. 2000;53:39‐52. https://www.revespcardiol.org/es‐el‐trasplante‐cardiaco‐espana‐organizacion‐articulo‐10738
Peura JL, Colvin‐Adams M, Francis GS, et al. Recommendations for the use of mechanical circulatory support: device strategies and patient selection: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2012;126:2648‐2667.
Feldman D, Pamboukian SV, Teuteberg JJ, et al. The 2013 international society for heart and lung transplantation guidelines for mechanical circulatory support: executive summary. J Heart Lung Transplant. 2013;32:157‐187.
Velleca A, Shullo MA, Dhital K, et al. The international society for heart and lung transplantation (ISHLT) guidelines for the care of heart transplant recipients. J Heart Lung Transplant. 2023;42(5):e1‐e141. doi:10.1016/j.healun.2022.10.015
Mehra MR, Canter CE, Hannan MM. International society for heart lung transplantation (ISHLT) infectious diseases, pediatric and heart failure and transplantation councils. the 2016 international society for heart lung transplantation listing criteria for heart transplantation: a 10‐year update. J Heart Lung Transplant. 2016;35(1):1‐23. doi:10.1016/j.healun.2015.10.023
Luo X‐J, Wang W, Hu S‐S, et al. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for treatment of cardiac failure in adult patients. Interact Cardiovasc Thoracic Surg. 2009;9(2):296‐300. doi:10.1510/icvts.2008.197681
Rastan AJ, Dege A, Mohr M, et al. Early and late outcomes of 517 consecutive adult patients treated with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for refractory postcardiotomy cardiogenic shock. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2010;139(2):302‐311. doi:10.1016/j.jtcvs.2009.10.043
Extracorporeal Life Support Registry Report. Extracorporeal Life Support Organization. Accessed on January 10, 2021. https://www.elso.org/Registry/Statistics/InternationalSummary.aspx
Burkhoff D, Cohen H, Brunckhorst C, et al. A randomized multicenter clinical study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the TandemHeart percutaneous ventricular assist device versus conventional therapy with intraaortic balloon pumping for treatment of cardiogenic shock. Am Heart J. 2006;152:469.
Seyfarth M, Sibbing D, Bauer I, et al. A randomized clinical trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a percutaneous left ventricular assist device versus intra‐aortic balloon pumping for treatment of cardiogenic shock caused by myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008;52:1584‐1588.
Zalawadiya S, Fudim M, Bhat G, Cotts W, Lindenfeld J. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support and post‐heart transplant outcomes among United States adults. J Heart Lung Transplant. 2017;36:77‐81.
Kilic A, Mathier MA, Hickey GW, et al. Evolving trends in adult heart transplant with the 2018 heart allocation policy change. JAMA Cardiol. 2021;6(2):159. doi:10.1001/jamacardio.2020.4909
Hanff TC, Harhay MO, Kimmel SE, et al. Trends in mechanical support use as a bridge to adult heart transplant under new allocation rules. JAMA Cardiol. 2020;5(6):728. doi:10.1001/jamacardio.2020.0667
Thiele H, Zeymer U, Neumann F‐J, et al. Intraaortic balloon support for myocardial infarction with cardiogenic shock. N Engl J Med. 2012;367(14):1287‐1296. doi:10.1056/nejmoa1208410
DeFilippis EM, Clerkin K, Truby LK, et al. ECMO as a bridge to left ventricular assist device or heart transplantation. JACC Heart Failure. 2021;9(4):281‐289. doi:10.1016/j.jchf.2020.12.012
Chung JC‐Y, Tsai P‐R, Chou N‐K, Chi N‐H, Wang S‐S, Ko W‐J. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation bridge to adult heart transplantation: eCMO bridge to heart transplantation. Clin Transplant. 2010;24(3):375‐380. doi:10.1111/j.1399‐0012.2009.01084.x
Mishra V, Fiane AE, Winsnes BA, et al. Cardiac replacement therapies: outcomes and costs for heart transplantation versus circulatory assist. Scand Cardiovasc J. 2017;51(1):1‐7. doi:10.1080/14017431.2016.1196826
Jasseron C, Lebreton G, Cantrelle C, et al. Impact of heart transplantation on survival in patients on venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation at listing in France. Transplantation. 2016;100(9):1979‐1987. doi:10.1097/tp.0000000000001265
Barge‐Caballero E, Almenar‐Bonet L, Gonzalez‐Vilchez F, et al. Clinical outcomes of temporary mechanical circulatory support as a direct bridge to heart transplantation: a nationwide Spanish registry. Eur J Heart Fail. 2018;20(1):178‐186. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejhf.956
Lechiancole A, Sponga S, Isola M, Vendramin I, Maiani M, Livi U. Heart transplantation in patients supported by ECMO: is the APACHE IV score a predictor of survival? Artif Organs. 2018;42(6):670‐673. doi:10.1111/aor.13099
Barbaro RP, Odetola FO, Kidwell KM, Paden ML, Bartlett RH, Davis MM. Association of hospital‐level volume of ECMO cases and mortality. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2015;191(8):894‐901.
Šipuš D, Krželj K, Đurić Ž, et al. Veno‐arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation as a bridge to heart transplant—change of paradigm. J Clin Med. 2022;11(23):7101. doi:10.3390/jcm11237101