Key result
Postimplant PDE-5i use is linked to a ~16% lower risk of LVAD thrombosis and ischemic stroke.
Why the study?
LVAD thrombosis is clinically devastating, and although PDE-5 inhibitors exhibit hemodynamic, antiplatelet, and antithrombotic effects, their relationship with thrombotic events in patients with continuous-flow LVADs was unexamined.
Does postimplant PDE-5i use reduce the composite of LVAD thrombosis and ischemic stroke in patients with continuous-flow LVADs?
Cohort (n=13,772)
Yes
Does postimplant PDE-5i use reduce the composite of LVAD thrombosis and ischemic stroke in patients with continuous-flow LVADs?
Hazard Ratio: 0.84 (95% CI 0.77–0.91)
p-value: p=<0.001
Postimplant use of PDE-5 inhibitors in patients with continuous-flow LVADs is associated with lower rates of thrombotic events and improved survival.
May support PDE-5i consideration post-LVAD; leaves open confirmation of benefit in randomized trials.
Background Left ventricular assist device ( LVAD ) thrombosis is clinically devastating and impacts the cost effectiveness of LVAD therapy for advanced heart failure. Anticoagulation and antiplatelet therapies represent the standard of care to mitigate LVAD thrombosis. Phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors ( PDE ‐5is) exhibit hemodynamic, antiplatelet, and antithrombotic effects. Using a national registry, we examined the relationship of PDE ‐5i use on thrombotic events in patients with continuous‐flow LVAD s. Methods and Results We obtained data from 13 772 patients with continuous flow LVAD s participating in a national registry. Patients implanted with primary LVADs from 2012 to 2017 were included in the analysis. The primary end point was a composite of LVAD thrombosis and ischemic stroke. Patients were analyzed according to any use of PDE ‐5i after LVAD implantation ( PDE ‐5i group) versus no use after LVAD implantation (no PDE ‐5i group). The primary end point was significantly lower in the PDE ‐5i group compared with the no PDE ‐5i group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.84; 95% CI, 0.77–0.91; P <0.001) at 48 months. The components of the primary end point ( LVAD thrombosis: HR, 0.82; 95% CI , 0.74–0.90; P <0.001; and ischemic stroke: HR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.75–0.97; P =0.019), as well as the secondary end point all‐cause mortality (HR, 0.86; 95% CI , 0.79–0.93; P <0.001) were lower in the PDE ‐5i group versus the no PDE ‐5i at 48 months post LVAD . The favorable results observed with postimplant PDE ‐5i use were consistent with both axial and centrifugal flow devices. Conclusions The postimplant use of PDE ‐5i was associated with fewer thrombotic events and improved survival in LVAD patients. A randomized clinical trial is warranted to confirm these findings.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Xanthopoulos et al. (2020) conducted a cohort in Advanced heart failure with continuous-flow LVAD (n=13,772). Phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors (PDE-5is) vs. No PDE-5i use after LVAD implantation was evaluated on Composite of LVAD thrombosis and ischemic stroke (HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.77-0.91, p=<0.001). Postimplant use of PDE-5 inhibitors was associated with a lower risk of LVAD thrombosis and ischemic stroke (HR 0.84; 95% CI 0.77-0.91; P<0.001) at 48 months.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: