Key result
Prolonged pre-transplant LVAD support yields similar post-transplant survival compared with direct heart transplantation.
Why the study?
While LVAD therapy serves as a bridge to heart transplantation with improved outcomes, it has inherent limitations including device-related complications, motivating an evaluation of the impact of prolonged LVAD support on post-transplantation outcomes compared with direct transplantation.
Does prolonged pre-transplant LVAD support impact post-transplantation survival, rejection rates, renal function, and 1-year haemodynamics compared to direct heart transplantation in patients with advanced heart failure?
Cohort (n=148)
No
Does prolonged pre-transplant LVAD support impact post-transplantation survival, rejection rates, renal function, and 1-year haemodynamics compared to direct heart transplantation in patients with advanced heart failure?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Prolonged LVAD support (median >2 years) as a bridge to heart transplantation does not adversely affect post-transplant survival, rejection rates, or renal function compared to direct transplantation, despite minor differences in 1-year invasive haemodynamics.
Background Durable mechanical circulatory support with a left ventricular assist device (LVAD) serves as bridge to heart transplantation (HTx) in patients with advanced heart failure. LVAD therapy is associated with improved outcomes, but has inherent limitations, including device-related complications. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the impact of prolonged LVAD support in patients who underwent HTx as compared to those without LVAD support. Method We retrospectively analysed 148 HTx recipients at University Medical Center Groningen, the Netherlands (2007–2023): 52 with prior LVAD support and 96 direct HTx patients. Outcomes included post-HTx survival, rejection requiring treatment, 1-year cardiac haemodynamics, and need for kidney replacement therapy. Results Median LVAD duration was 757 days (range 16–2,113). The LVAD group had fewer females (21% vs 54%; p<0.001). After a median 3.5-year follow-up, post-HTx survival was similar between groups (hazard ratio 0.83; 95% confidence interval 0.40–1.6; p=0.52). No significant differences were observed in the incidence of rejection requiring therapy (p=0.91) nor need for kidney replacement therapy (p=0.05–0.42). At 1-year post-HTx, the LVAD group showed modestly elevated pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (12.7 vs 10.6 mmHg; p=0.03) and reduced cardiac index (3.0 vs 3.3 L/min/m 2 ; p=0.03) compared to direct HTx recipients. Conclusions Prolonged LVAD support as bridge-to-transplantation showed no statistically significant differences with direct HTx in terms of post-HTx survival, rejection rates, and renal function despite minor differences in 1-year haemodynamic parameters.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Puspitarani et al. (2026) conducted a cohort in Advanced heart failure undergoing heart transplantation (n=148). Prolonged pre-transplant left ventricular assist device (LVAD) support vs. Direct heart transplantation without prior LVAD support was evaluated on Post-heart transplantation survival (HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.40-1.6, p=0.52). Prolonged pre-transplant LVAD support yielded similar post-transplant survival compared to direct heart transplantation.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: