Citations

Abstract Background Patients with end-stage heart failure and chronic kidney disease requiring dual-organ transplantation (DOT) face significant challenges in utilizing durable mechanical circulatory support due to the risks associated with renal replacement therapies (RRTs) and multi-organ failure. Given the limited options available for long-term support in this patient population, there remains a critical need for alternative strategies to optimize end-organ function and bridge patients safely to transplant. With prolonged waitlist times for DOT, we present our experience with the Impella 5.5 as temporary mechanical circulatory support, demonstrating its potential to provide hemodynamic stability and support as a bridge to transplantation (BTT) in this complex cohort. Methods A single-centre retrospective review was completed of all patients listed for single-organ transplantation or DOT between December 2019 and November 2022 at Mayo Clinic in Florida, supported by the Impella 5.5 intended as BTT. The focus of this analysis was patients requiring RRT or listed for heart/kidney transplantation. Data were extracted from the electronic health record at baseline and during their transplant episode of care after institutional review board approval as exempt status for retrospective data collection. Results A total of 41 patients were supported with Impella 5.5, intended as BTT. All patients underwent successful transplantation. We focus on the 10 patients with Impella support who underwent DOT. In the DOT group, the median age at transplantation was 63 years (59–66), with nine males and one female. The baseline median ejection fraction was 19% (15–22), with 50% Caucasian and 50% African American and an even split between ischaemic and non-ischaemic aetiology. Median body mass index was 30 kg/m2 (26–31), and 60% were in blood group O. The median time on the waitlist for DOT patients was 53 days (29–75). Perioperative management of DOT Impella patients demonstrated baseline haemodynamics of RA 11 mmHg (7–16), mean PA 36 mmHg (32–47), PCWP 29 mmHg (21–35), mixed venous saturation (SVO2%) 51 (46–61) and Fick CI 2.03 L/min/m2 (1.66–2.5). Post-Impella placement haemodynamics demonstrated significant improvements in RA pressure to 5 mmHg (4–8), P = 0.02, SVO2 to 70% (65–72), P = 0.002, and Fick CI to 5.5 (5.2–8), P = 0.03. The average duration of support was 44 days (range 10–94). The median glomerular filtration rate at baseline was 27 mmol/L (16–29). Twenty-four hour urine protein averaged 168 mg/24 h (range 87–328), with the 24 h creatinine clearance of 29 mg/24 h (range 24–35). Eight of the 10 patients required continuous or intermittent RRT before DOT. The median total duration of RRT (including Impella support) was 36 days (9–72). DOT recipients had a 1 year survival of 90%, with an average follow-up of 432 days. Conclusions Our findings demonstrate that prolonged use of the Impella 5.5 provides safe and effective haemodynamic support for patients with end-stage heart and kidney failure awaiting dual-organ transplantation. With a 1 year survival rate of 90%, our data suggest that Impella 5.5 can be a viable alternative to traditional support strategies, particularly in patients who are otherwise limited by RRTs. As dual-organ transplantation becomes more prevalent, the Impella 5.5 offers a promising bridge to transplant, improving both short-term and long-term outcomes in this complex patient population.

Heart transplantation is a well-established treatment for end-stage heart failure, but many patients present in poor physical condition, complicating outcomes. The Impella 5.5 device, used in cardiogenic shock, may support pretransplant rehabilitation by stabilizing organ function and promoting functional improvement. This retrospective cohort study assessed the relationship between functional status, measured by standardized Activity Measure for Post-Acute Care Basic Mobility (AM-PAC) scores, and days alive outside the hospital within 30 days post-transplant (DAOH-30). Patients who received Impella 5.5 support before transplantation between January 2019 and October 2023 were included, excluding those without AM-PAC scores within 24 hours pretransplant. Among 65 patients, the median DAOH-30 was 15 days (interquartile range [IQR], 8–19). Higher pretransplant standardized AM-PAC scores correlate with increased DAOH-30 (adjusted coefficient 0.3; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.01–0.6; p = 0.04), as did AM-PAC score improvement during rehabilitation (adjusted coefficient 0.35; 95% CI = 0.01–0.6; p = 0.04). Extended rehabilitation was associated with greater functional gains. These findings suggest that better pretransplant functional status and rehabilitation-related improvements were associated with increased DAOH-30. The Impella 5.5 device facilitates rehabilitation and may enhance post-transplant outcomes. Further research should refine strategies to optimize rehabilitation and recovery in this high-risk population.

Abstract Rationale: Early management after heart transplantation is essential for survival and quality of life, but we lack data on how initial clinical measures might predict patient outcomes. This study investigates whether early postoperative hemodynamic and clinical parameters can predict 1-year mortality and complications. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study of 550 heart transplant patients treated at the Mayo Clinic from 2019 to 2023. Demographic, hemodynamic, and clinical data, including Central Venous Pressure (CVP), Pulmonary Arterial Pressure (PAP), cardiac index, Pulmonary Artery Pulsatility Index (PaPi), blood pressure, heart rate, and Vasoactive-Inotropic Score (VIS), were collected. Key outcomes included 1-year mortality, Intensive Care Unit (ICU) and hospital stay durations, and complications such as respiratory issues and Acute Kidney Injury (AKI). Patients were divided into quartiles based on VIS scores to compare clinical outcomes. Logistic regression assessed how each parameter predicted 1-year mortality. Results: The patients’ mean age was 53.3±13.1 years, with 391 (71.1%) male and an average Body Mass Index (BMI) of 27.5±4.9. The median ICU stay was 9 days (Interquartile Range [IQR]: 4-22.8), and the median hospital stay was 35 days (IQR: 17-57.8). Within one year, 28 (5.1%) patients experienced mortality and ICU readmission occurred in 52 (9.5%) patients. Higher VIS quartiles were associated with worse outcomes. Logistic regression revealed three significant predictors of 1-year mortality: higher CVP (p=0.0305) and lower Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) (p=0.0484) were linked to increased mortality risk, while each unit increase in VIS (p=0.0355) raised mortality odds by 6% (Odds Ratio [OR]: 1.06, 95% Confidence Interval [CI]: 1.004-1.113). Additionally, respiratory complications were seen in 177 (32.2%) patients, and AKI in 407 (74.0%) patients. AKI significantly predicted mortality (OR=2.50, p=0.044), while both ICU readmission (OR=2.98, p<0.001) and AKI (OR=3.49, p<0.001) predicted respiratory complications. Conclusions: Early postoperative hemodynamic and clinical parameters, especially higher VIS scores, are significant indicators of 1-year mortality in heart transplant patients. These findings highlight the importance of early assessment to identify high-risk patients and potentially guide post-transplant management strategies.

BACKGROUND: A preservation system, the Organ Care System (OCS; TransMedics) uses normothermic pulsatile perfusion during organ transport for heart transplantation. This system has demonstrated favorable outcomes in hearts recovered from extended-criteria donors after brain death (DBD) and donors after circulatory death (DCD). METHODS: The OCS Heart Perfusion Registry collects data on US heart transplantations using the OCS, static cold storage (SCS), or thoracoabdominal normothermic regional perfusion (NRP) and donor hearts recovered from DBD or DCD donors. We analyzed donor and recipient characteristics and posttransplantation outcomes in patients transplanted with OCS donor hearts (either DBD or DCD) compared with SCS hearts, and with OCS hearts from DCD donors compared with those recovered with NRP followed by SCS. Propensity score matching was used in survival analyses to adjust for differences among recipient characteristics. RESULTS: Between 2021 and 2023, 3225 consecutive heart transplantations enrolled from 56 centers were analyzed in the Heart Perfusion Registry. The OCS was used in 854 of 3225 heart transplantations (26.4%), among which 340 (39.8%) were DBD and 514 (60.2%) were DCD donors, whereas 2174 DBD donors were recovered with SCS and another 197 DCD donors with NRP techniques. The OCS-DBD group experienced a greater number of organ offer refusals before final acceptance (13 versus 6; Wilcoxon rank sum, P <0.001) and a longer transport distance (667 miles versus 232 miles; Wilcoxon rank sum, P <0.001) compared with SCS-DBD. Survival at 12 months was similar between the 2 groups (89.9% for OCS-DBD versus 90.6% for SCS-DBD; marginal Cox model, P =0.54). Among the OCS-DCD and SCS-DBD groups, survival at 12 months was also similar (91.0% versus 92.5%, respectively; marginal Cox model, P =0.32). The OCS-DCD and NRP-DCD groups demonstrated similar survival (91.0% versus 91.7%, respectively; log rank, P =0.63), although the transport distance was longer in OCS-DCD compared with DCD with NRP followed by SCS (400 miles versus 223 miles; Wilcoxon rank sum, P <0.001). By 2023, 90% of all OCS donor management and recovery was performed with dedicated organ recovery teams. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrate that real-world implementation of the OCS for DBD donors (using predominantly a dedicated recovery team) is associated with expanded donor criteria, longer transport distance, and excellent posttransplantation outcomes. In OCS-DCD donors, outcomes parallel those of donors recovered with NRP-DCD and compare favorably with DBD donor organs.

AbstractBackgroundThe prognosis in patients with advanced cardiac amyloidosis (CA) remains poor.ObjectivesWe sought to describe survival post heart transplantation (HT) in amyloid compared with non‐amyloid recipients, highlight waitlist times within the new allocation system across three Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) regions, and describe multiorgan transplantation (MOT) in hereditary amyloidosis.MethodsThis is a retrospective review of end‐stage CA patients who underwent HT at Mayo Clinic from January 2007 to December 2020. Wait time was compared in the new versus old OPTN allocation era starting December 18, 2018 by Wilcoxon rank sum test. All‐cause mortality for those with and without CA was compared using Kaplan–Meier estimates with log rank analysis, censoring December 16, 2022.ResultsFifty‐five patients with CA underwent HT between 2007 and 2020, 8 light chain amyloidosis (AL) (14.5%), 28 hereditary transthyretin (ATTRv) (50.9%), 17 wildtype transthyretin (ATTRwt) (30.9%), and 2 hereditary apolipoprotein A1 (AApoA1) amyloidosis patients (3.6%). No significant difference in overall survival post‐transplant was seen in amyloid compared with non‐amyloid (p = 0.816). Median time to HT was shorter in the new system, 45 days (IQR 24, 78) versus 174 days (IQR 76.5, 483.5), p = 0.006. There was a decline in MOT in hereditary amyloidosis over time with the concomitant rise in disease‐targeted therapies.ConclusionsHT survival in CA patients was similar to non‐amyloid patients. The new allocation system benefits this cohort with shorter wait times. There is less MOT in hereditary amyloidosis with increased utilization of disease‐targeted therapy.