Citations

Background: We sought to investigate temporal trends in patient characteristics, waitlist, and posttransplant outcomes after heart transplantation in the United States. Methods: Using data from the United Network of Organ Sharing, we identified adults listed for heart transplantation between 1991 and 2019. Patients were divided into 4 eras based on the 3 time points in which changes were made to the patient selection/allocation policy (Era 1=January 1991–January 1999; Era 2=January 1999–July 2006; Era 3=July 2006–October 2018; and Era 4=October 2018–March 2020), and patient characteristics, waitlist, and posttransplant outcomes were evaluated for each era. Results: Between 1991 and 2019, 95 179 patients were added to the heart transplantation waitlist. Compared with Era 1, patients listed in Era 4 were older (mean age: 50 versus 52 years) and with higher risk comorbidities (eg, 10% versus 28.8% diabetes, 23.3% versus 35.6% obese). Over the study period, 22 738 patients died or were permanently delisted for deterioration on the waitlist while 61 687 were transplanted. Compared with the preceding era, there was significant decrease in death or deterioration in the last 2 eras (sub-hazard ratio, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.65–0.70] for Era 3 versus Era 2 and sub-hazard ratio, 0.65 [95% CI, 0.58–0.73] for Era 4 versus 3). Across the years, 27.1% to 40.5% of those on the waitlist were transplanted. Among those transplanted, there was increase in the rates of in-hospital stroke (2.8% in Era 1 to 3.7% in Era 4), renal failure requiring dialysis (7.2%–17.1%), and length-of-stay (14–17days), P <0.001. However, this did not negatively impact short-term survival when compared with the preceding era (1-year graft survival from Era 1 to Era 4=84.1%, 86.4%, 90.4%, and 89.7%, respectively). Conclusions: There have been significant changes in the characteristics of patients listed for heart transplantation. Although transplant volume has increased, the wide supply-demand gap persisted. The last two changes in the allocation policy achieved their primary objective of reducing waitlist mortality.

AbstractBackgroundThe orientation of facial ligaments changes with increasing age due to the loss of bony support. Soft tissue filler injections placed in close proximity to facial ligaments can alter their orientation to help achieve an improved and younger aesthetic appearance.ObjectiveTo assess the anatomic and aesthetic effects of a standardized injection with soft tissue filler placed directly inferior to the orbicularis retaining ligament in the infraorbital region.MethodsA total of 163 patients with signs of infraorbital aging were treated with a standardized soft tissue filler injection into and in close proximity to the orbicularis retaining ligament (ORL). 2D frontal images of the infraorbital region were rated by eleven blinded and independent raters with regards to the aesthetic appearance of the infraorbital region before and after the standardized injection treatment.ResultsThe aesthetic appearance of the entire infraorbital region (lid‐cheek junction) was rated before and after the treatment. The severity of the tear trough (medial aspect of the infraorbital region) as well as the hollowing of the lateral aspect of the infraorbital region also was rated before and after the treatment. Aesthetic improvement was statistically significant when evaluated by the blinded raters, the treating physician, and the patients. All the results were “very much improved” compared to baseline.ConclusionThe effectiveness of this injection technique is thought to be due to the strategic placement of soft tissue filler that helps to reposition facial ligaments that have changed their orientation during the aging process.

Abstract Background Increased epicardial adipose tissue (EAT) thickness correlates with metabolic syndrome, insulin resistance, microvascular dysfunction and enhanced pericardial restraint. Purpose We measured echocardiographic EAT thickness in heart failure (HF) patients with reduced (HFrEF) or preserved (HFpEF) ejection fraction to determine whether EAT could bear prognostic significance at clinical follow-up. Methods We prospectively enrolled 393 consecutive HF outpatients (205 HFrEF, 188 HFpEF) referred to our hospital due to dyspnoea and/or effort intolerance. We performed a resting clinical and biohumoral evaluation, followed by combined cardiopulmonary-echocardiography exercise stress. A composite of cardiovascular death and HF-related hospitalization was chosen as endpoint during follow-up. Results Patients with HFpEF displayed higher EAT thickness (median 8 mm, interquartile range [IQR] 4–12 mm) than HFrEF (median 3 mm, IQR 2–6 mm; p&lt;0.0001). During a median follow-up of 20.9 months (IQR 15–25 months), we reported 34 cardiovascular deaths and 146 HF hospitalizations, with no significant differences between the two HF subsets. EAT predicted adverse events independently from body mass index and well-established markers of poor prognosis (e.g., NT-proBNP, peak oxygen consumption). The risk of adverse events increased with increasing EAT thickness in HFpEF and with EAT thinning in HFrEF. Kaplan-Meier analyses for the composite endpoint showed that in HFpEF, the survival probability was significantly lower in patients with thicker EAT than those with thinner EAT. In HFrEF, conversely, patients with thicker EAT had a higher survival probability than those with reduced EAT thickness (Figure 1). Conclusion EAT accumulation is more marked in HFpEF than HFrEF and carries different prognostic meanings in the two subsets. In HFpEF, EAT thickening portends adverse outcome, which may be due to increased mechanical restraint and secretion of pro-inflammatory and pro-atherogenic adipokines. In HFrEF, greater EAT thickness seems to have a protective role, while EAT thinning is associated with a worse prognosis, likely reflecting a catabolic state (i.e. cardiac cachexia). Larger studies will clarify whether EAT is a bystander or an active player in the different HF phenotypes. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: None. Figure 1