Citations

Cardiac allograft vasculopathy (CAV) remains a leading cause of graft failure after heart transplantation, yet an early, non-invasive risk stratification tool is not available. Artificial intelligence electrocardiography (AI-ECG) can estimate biological heart age, and it has been associated with cardiovascular risk. Its deviation with chronological age, called delta age, and its utility in the prediction of CAV has never been explored. We conducted a retrospective single-center study for heart transplant recipients bridged with Impella 5.5 (Abiomed, Danvers, MA, USA) at Mayo Clinic Florida (2020–2023). ΔAge was calculated at discharge and 1-year post-transplant. The primary outcome was confirmed CAV at 1 year. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression models were used to assess the independent association between the ΔAge and the development of CAV, with discrimination evaluated by AUC and internally validated via bootstrap resampling (2000 iterations). Fifty patients were reviewed. CAV developed in 13 (26%) patients in 3 years. CAV+ patients had a significantly higher ΔAge at discharge compared to CAV- patients (median −1.0 vs. −11.0 years, p = 0.0023) and at 1 year (median +7.0 vs. −4.0 years, p = 0.0080). On univariate analysis, ΔAge at discharge was a significant predictor of the development of CAV (OR 1.084 per year, AUC 0.788). On multivariable adjustment, ΔAge at discharge remained an independent predictor (adjusted OR 1.138, 95% CI 1.023–1.265, p = 0.018, and model AUC 0.859). ΔAge at discharge is a novel and potential predictor of the development of CAV within 3 years. These findings support the integration of AI-ECG into post-transplant surveillance as a scalable, low-cost tool.

The Impella 5.5 is an axillary mechanical circulatory support device used in patients with cardiogenic shock, but those with small left ventricular (LV) cavities may be at risk for suction events, hemolysis, malpositioning, hypoperfusion, and LV injury. Informally accepted guidelines, extrapolated from durable LVAD studies, suggest a minimum left ventricular internal dimension in diastole (LVIDd) of 58 mm, with some clinical practices using a more stringent ≤52 mm cutoff. We retrospectively analyzed 154 consecutive patients supported with Impella 5.5 between January 2020 and December 2024. Overall, 38 patients had an LVIDd ≤58 mm, and 116 had an LVIDd >58 mm; a key subgroup of 21 patients presented with a very small LVIDd of ≤52 mm]. Baseline demographics, comorbidities, body mass index, and renal function were similar [across groups], although those with larger LVIDd had lower ejection fractions (16% vs. 24%, p = 0.001). Median support duration was 24 days in all groups, and pre- and post-implant hemodynamic and laboratory improvements were comparable. Rates of transplantation (79% vs. 90%, p = 0.088) and LVAD implantation (2% vs. 6%, p = 0.159) did not differ significantly in the ≤58 mm cohort. Notably, within the ≤52 mm subgroup, 90-day survival remained high at 90.5% ( p = 0.336), with significant improvements in right atrial pressure (17 to 10 mmHg, p = 0.041), mean pulmonary artery pressure (36 to 26 mmHg, p = 0.008), and eGFR (45 to 57 mL/min/1.73m 2 , p = 0.003). Remarkably, native cardiac recovery was observed exclusively in the smaller LV cohorts, occurring in 11% of the ≤58 mm group ( p = 0.003 vs. 0%, p = 0.003) and reaching 19% in the ≤52 mm group (vs. 0% in larger cavities, p < 0.001), while durable LVAD escalation was entirely avoided in the ≤52 mm cohort (0% vs. 6%). Ninety-day event-free survival was excellent across all cohorts 92% vs. 96% in the primary analysis, with no major device-related complications, suction events, clinically significant hemolysis, bleeding, stroke, or escalation to Bi-VAD support. These findings strongly support the safety and feasibility of Impella 5.5 in extremely constrained, small LV cavities.

Post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorder (PTLD) involving the central nervous system (CNS) is a rare but serious life-threatening complication seen in recipients of solid organ transplant. Primary CNS encompasses 5–15% of all types of PTLD diagnoses, and heart transplant recipients represent 3–5% of those reported cases. Diagnosis is often delayed due to the highly variable presentation, with some cases remaining undiagnosed for years. Multidisciplinary collaboration is crucial for early diagnosis and management. A 53-year-old woman patient presented with altered mental status. MRI revealed nodular ventriculitis and bilateral periventricular hyperdense infiltrates. CSF studies demonstrated lymphocytic pleocytosis, elevated protein, and EBV-PCR-positive results. A stereotactic brain needle biopsy confirmed the presence of EBV-positive diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, consistent with primary CNS PTLD, 14 months after her heart transplant. Despite appropriate management, the patient experienced progressive neurological decline and ultimately suffered a fatal intracerebral hemorrhage. We demonstrate the importance of the early diagnosis and variable presentation of post-heart-transplant PTLD. The importance of surveillance regardless of EBV status and close monitoring of disease progression due to potential life-threatening complications, such as fatal hemorrhages. Therefore, primary CNS-PTLD remains a challenging disease and is being increasingly recognized with improved transplant recipient survival and prolonged exposure to chronic immunosuppression.

Introduction: Although the role of cardiometabolic risk factors (CMRF) has been characterized in steatotic liver disease, their role in the severity of alcohol-associated hepatitis (AH) remains unclear. We aimed to evaluate the impact of CMRF on mortality. Methods: Multinational prospective cohort study (2015–2024) including hospitalized patients with severe AH across 32 centers in 14 countries. Diagnosis of AH was made using the NIAAA criteria. Analyses included adjusted competing-risk models by age, sex, ethnicity, history of cirrhosis, CMRF, corticosteroid use, MELD, and ACLF grade, with liver transplantation as a competing risk. Results: 936 participants were included; mean age 48±11.2 years, and 88.9% were male. At least one CMRF was present in 46.6%; median body mass index (BMI) was 24.2 kg/m 2 [IQR: 22.8–28.2], prevalence of diabetes 17.6%, hypertension 16.5%, and dyslipidemia 5.8%. Median MELD was 24.4 [19.3–31.4], 86.7% had severe AH, and 180-day survival was 72.9%. Survival did not differ by CMRF status (log-rank p =0.453). In adjusted competing-risk models, higher age (sHR 1.02; 95%CI:1.01–1.04), greater alcohol intake (per g/day; sHR 1.001; 95%CI:1.000–1.002), MELD (sHR 1.04; 95%CI:1.01–1.06), and ACLF grade 2–3 (sHR 2.34 and 4.34) predicted mortality. However, no individual CMRF independently increased mortality. A prespecified non-linear BMI analysis showed modestly lower mortality between 25–40 kg/m², with a higher risk above 40 kg/m². Conclusion: Among patients with severe AH, metabolic dysfunction was not associated with increased mortality. Although a higher BMI was associated with slightly lower mortality in AH, this may reflect better nutritional status rather than a true protective effect.

INTRODUCTION: Nosocomial infections (NIs) in cirrhosis are associated with high mortality but could be preventable. Logistic regression (LR) models have failed to identify high-risk patients. We aimed to develop machine learning (ML) models to predict NI. METHODS: The CLEARED consortium consists of prospectively enrolled cirrhosis inpatients from >120 centers. Using day-of-admission clinical data, 3 ML approaches (random forest [RF], extreme gradient boosting, and neural networks [NNs]) were used to predict NI. Data were split 80:20 for training and testing stratified by the outcome. Models were compared using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). RESULTS: In total, 8,263 patients (55.90 ± 13.34 years; 64.1% men) from 127 centers in 37 countries were included. NI developed in 869 (10.5%), a median of 6 (4–11) days of postadmission. Major NIs were respiratory (29.6%) and urinary tract infection (15.7%), and spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (13.5%). NIs occurred more frequently in patients from low/low-middle income countries and those with severe liver disease, alcohol etiology, and admission infections. NIs were associated with inpatient mortality (31.9% vs 8.1%, P < 0.001) and liver transplantation (4.8% vs 1.9%, P < 0.001). Although the RF model (AUC 0.69) showed good calibration (Brier score 0.09), outperforming extreme gradient boosting, neural network, and LR models (AUC 0.66 for all; LR comparison P = 0.043), no model achieved AUC ≥0.80 for clinical utility. At 10% predicted probability threshold, the RF model demonstrated only 75.4% sensitivity, 52.9% specificity, and 15.9% positive predictive value (PPV). DISCUSSION: NIs cannot be accurately predicted from day-of-admission data using ML models, even in a large, prospective, global cirrhosis cohort. Every hospitalized patient with cirrhosis should receive protocolized infection control measures.

Background: Impella 5.5 is a temporary MCS device FDA-approved for use up to 14 days. Limited data suggest it may be safe beyond this. We aim assess outcomes based on the duration of Impella 5.5 support in heart failure cardiogenic shock (HFCS) patients at our institution. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed all HFCS patients supported with Impella 5.5 at our institution between 2020-2024. Patients supported for >14 days were compared with those supported for ≤14 days. Categorical variables were analyzed with chi-square tests, continuous variables with t-tests or Mann-Whitney U. Logistic regression identified factors linked to clinical outcomes. Results: 154 patients were included: 38 (25%) with support ≤14 days, 116 (75%) with >14 days. Median support duration was 10 (6–12) vs 31 (22–45) days, respectively. Median support duration was 10 (6-12) days for the ≤14 cohort and 31 days (22-45) days for the >14 cohort. Baseline characteristics, comorbidities, LVEF 18% (15-23) and hemodynamics show no statistical differences. Patients supported for >14 days were more likely to undergo heart transplant compared to those supported ≤14 days (91% vs 74%, p=0.009). In contrast, myocardial recovery was more likely in the ≤14 day cohort (8% vs 1%, p=0.018). One patient suffered stroke post-transplant in the ≤14 day group and two had brachial plexus injuries in the >14 days group. Mortality during the impella-supported period was slightly higher in the ≤14 day group (8% vs 5%, p=0.535) but comparable overall, 13% in both groups, p=0.971. Support >14 days was associated with transplant outcome (OR 3.41, 95% CI 1.32–8.84, p=0.012), and remained significant after adjusting for age, gender, GFR, and EF (OR 4.05, 95% CI 1.31–12.54, p=0.015). Support duration <14 days was associated with recovery or LVAD outcomes (OR 5.01, 95% CI 1.49–16.89, p=0.009), and remained significant after adjustment (OR 5.43, 95% CI 1.11–26.45, p=0.036). No association was observed between duration of support and LVAD/mortality outcomes or with EcPella use. Conclusion: Shorter Impella support duration was independently associated with early myocardial recovery or LVAD candidacy, likely reflecting rapid clinical decision-making. Prolonged Impella support was associated with increased likelihood of transitioning to heart transplantation, likely reflecting clinical stabilization over time. Our multidisciplinary, single-center data suggests Impella 5.5 can be used beyond FDA-approved 14 days in HFCS patients.

Background: Heart transplantation is the definitive treatment of end-stage heart failure and is a complex process involving coordination in procurement, preservation, and transport of a donor organ to a recipient. There are different heart transport methods, including the traditional static methods of Cooler and Ryobi and advanced dynamic methods, including SherpaPak and the Organ Care System (OCS). The aim of the study is to compare the post-transplant outcome of these in patients bridged with Impella 5.5. Method: A retrospective study was conducted between 2020 and 2025 after IRB approval. Patient demographics and clinical data was extracted from the medical record. Cox proportional hazards regression model was applied to identify independent predictors of mortality across 30-day, 90-day, and 1-year intervals. Results: 123 patients were included in the analysis. Age, EF and Race were similar between all groups. The transport method was a significant predictor of 1-year mortality. Use of OCS (HR=0.022, p value <0.05) and SherpaPak (HR=0.066, p value <0.05) was associated with a significant decrease in mortality compared to traditional cooler use. Across 30-day, 90-day, and 1-year intervals, OCS showed the strongest survival benefit, while SherpaPak also demonstrated reduced mortality, but less significant compared to OCS. Conclusion: Transport method is a strong predictor of 1-year post-transplant mortality, with OCS showing the most pronounced effect in reducing the risk of 1-year mortality as well as mortality across 30-day and 90-day intervals. These findings support broader adoption of advanced transport systems in clinical practice to improve post-transplant outcomes.

Background: Renal dysfunction is a known prognostic factor in advanced heart failure and among patients receiving temporary mechanical circulatory support (tMCS). However, the predictive value of post-Impella creatinine in determining healthcare resource utilization in patients bridged to transplant with Impella 5.5 remains unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the association between post-Impella creatinine and key hospitalization metrics in this population. Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients who received Impella 5.5 as a bridge-to-transplant between January 2020 and January 2025. Serum creatinine was collected 72 hours after Impella placement. The primary outcome was device-to-discharge time. Secondary outcomes included transplant-to-discharge time, post-transplant ICU length of stay (LOS), and total LOS (admission-discharge). Univariate and multivariable linear regressions were used to examine the association between post-Impella creatinine and each outcome, adjusting for age, gender, BMI, and LVEF. Results: 133 patients were supported with the Impella 5.5 as BTT and were included (median age 58 years (51–65), 82.7% were male, and 71.4% presented with non-ischemic cardiomyopathy. The median BMI was 27.7 (24.3–32.3), LVEF 17% (15–22), and post-Impella creatinine 1.32 mg/dL (0.96–1.71). The median device-to-discharge time was 45 days (29-64), transplant-to-discharge time was 14 days (12–19), ICU LOS post-transplant was 6 days (4–8), and total LOS was 58 days (42–76). Higher post-Impella creatinine was significantly associated with longer device-to-discharge time (β = 6.67, p = 0.004), longer transplant-to-discharge duration (β = 3.42 p = 0.003), longer ICU LOS (β = 2.19, p = 0.007), and longer total LOS (β = 7.24, p = 0.002) on univariate analysis. Post-impella creatinine remained significantly associated with device-to-discharge time in the multivariate model after adjusting for confounders (β = 6.33, p = 0.006). Importantly, this suggests that patients with lower post-Impella creatinine levels may experience shorter hospitalizations and faster recovery trajectories following transplant. Conclusions: Post-Impella creatinine is a significant predictor of prolonged hospitalization in patients supported with Impella 5.5 as a bridge to transplant. These findings emphasize the prognostic importance of early renal function assessment and may guide risk stratification and resource planning in advanced heart failure care.

Background: Mechanical support strategies used for patients in shock prior to heart transplantation (OHT) correlates with post-transplant outcomes. OHT timing in patients supported by Impella 5.5 remains an evolving decision point, influenced by patient stability and donor logistics. With the emergence of organ transport technologies, we sought to determine whether the choice of system was associated with variations in pre-transplant support duration. Method: A retrospective review between Jan 2020 and May 2025 was completed. Patients were categorized by donor transport technology: traditional cooler, Organ Care System (OCS), or SherpaPak. The primary outcome was duration of Impella support (days) prior to transplant. Group-wise comparisons were performed using Kruskal-Wallis testing. Result: A total of 129 patients were assessed across three transport methods: traditional cooler:12, OCS: 35, SherpaPak: 84. Median age at transplant was 58 (51-65) years with EF of 17% (15-22). Cold ischemic time differed significantly across transport technologies (Kruskal-Wallis H = 77.4, p < 0.001) and was longest in OCS cases (417 min), compared to SherpaPak (236 min) and traditional cooler (234 min). The median duration of Impella support prior to OHT was 27 days for organs transported via traditional cooler, 25 days for those using OCS, and 28.5 days for SherpaPak with near-significant difference by transport method (H=5.77, p=0.056). There was no significant difference of rejection within the first year after OHT. Conclusion: Donor transport technology choice may serve as a surrogate for broader transplant logistics and selection strategies as evidenced by significant differences in ischemic time and near-significant trends in Impella support duration.

Background: Progressive heart failure cardiogenic shock (HFCS) often requires escalation to temporary or durable mechanical circulatory support (MCS) as a bridge to transplant (BTT). Following the 2018 UNOS allocation changes, our center revised its BTT strategy to optimize support and shorten wait times. At our institution, the Impella 5.5 with SmartAssist via the axillary approach was selectively used for patients who remained refractory to guideline-directed medical therapy, failed single-inotrope therapy, and were not considered suitable durable LVAD candidates by our multidisciplinary heart team. We compared transplant-related outcomes of BTT patients supported with Impella 5.5 versus durable LVAD. Methods: We performed a single-center retrospective review of all heart and heart/kidney transplant candidates at Mayo Clinic Florida from October 2018 to February 2021. INTERMACS profile, baseline characteristics, and perioperative data were collected at the time of device implantation and throughout the transplant hospitalization. Results: A total of 87 heart and 4 heart–kidney transplants were completed. Forty-five patients (49%) required MCS as BTT: 27 (60%) with a durable LVAD and 18 (40%) with an Impella 5.5. All eighteen patients with Impella 5.5 as BTT (100%) were transplanted compared to nineteen patients with durable LVAD (70%), p = 0.001. The median time from listing to transplant was substantially shorter with Impella (32 vs. 696 days, p < 0.001), and this difference persisted across INTERMACS profiles. UNOS status at transplant was more urgent for Impella than LVAD (p < 0.001). Transplant surgery following Impella support required shorter cardiopulmonary bypass time (181 vs. 219 min, p < 0.001) and resulted in lower postoperative vasoactive-inotropic requirements (7.9 vs. 13, p = 0.003). No patients in the Impella group died or were delisted while awaiting transplant, whereas 5 LVAD patients (26%) died or were removed due to LVAD complications (p < 0.001). Conclusions: Our data demonstrates that the use of the Impella 5.5 as BTT was associated with significantly shorter waitlist time, higher transplantation rates, reduced perioperative morbidity, and lower postoperative vasoactive support compared with durable LVAD as BTT. These benefits were achieved despite a higher severity of illness at transplantation in the Impella cohort.