Key result
Heart transplant recipients with restrictive cardiomyopathy had no significant differences in overall survival compared to the non-RCM population.
Why the study?
Restrictive cardiomyopathy has diverse etiologies and poor prognosis, and emerging therapies may have limited impact in end stages and are only recently available.
Does heart transplant in patients with restrictive cardiomyopathy result in similar survival compared to non-RCM patients?
Cohort (n=62,709)
Yes
Does heart transplant in patients with restrictive cardiomyopathy result in similar survival compared to non-RCM patients?
Heart transplant outcomes for restrictive cardiomyopathy are comparable to non-RCM patients and have improved over the last three decades, supporting its continued use in this population.
RCM post-transplant survival improved across eras; extends registry observations but remains hypothesis-generating for etiology-specific care.
Restrictive cardiomyopathy (RCM) comprises diverse etiologies with overall poor prognosis. Emerging therapies have significantly impacted some of these entities. However, these therapies may have limited impact in the end-stages and have only recently become available. We sought to assess outcomes before and after transplant in the RCM population stratified into 3 distinct time periods from the recent era. Retrospective analysis of the UNOS registry (n=62709) for all patients transplanted between 1987 - March 1, 2022 were stratified by RCM status with 1157 patients with RCM. Populations were grouped temporally into classic (1987-2000), contemporary (2000-2013), and current (2014-2022) eras. Multi-organ and repeat transplants were excluded from the analysis. Baseline demographics, listing status, hemodynamics, donor information, and life support methods were compared using Kruskal-Wallis and Pearson’s tests. Longitudinal survival was assessed via Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. Univariate and multivariate analysis using Cox modeling and competing outcomes analyses were performed. RCM patients were older, female, with older donors and longer ischemic times (p<0.001). There were no significant differences in overall survival compared to the non-RCM population, however, with increased transplant rates. Amyloidosis and chemotherapy/radiation portend the worst prognosis but have shorter waitlist times and up-trending survival in the current era. RCM represents a small but significant population of those requiring heart transplant. RCM transplant outcomes appear to be improving across all subsets with shorter wait times and better survival. Early recognition is important to help mitigate adverse outcomes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Miklin et al. (2023) conducted a cohort in Restrictive cardiomyopathy (n=62,709). Restrictive cardiomyopathy vs. Non-RCM heart transplant recipients was evaluated on Overall survival. Heart transplant recipients with restrictive cardiomyopathy had no significant differences in overall survival compared to the non-RCM population.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: