Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
##common.pageHeaderLogo.altText##

Review article: Biomedical intelligence

Vol. 143 No. 1314 (2013)

Destination therapy – time for a paradigm change in heart failure therapy

  • Markus Wilhelm
  • Frank Ruschitzka
  • Volkmar Falk
DOI
https://doi.org/10.4414/smw.2013.13729
Cite this as:
Swiss Med Wkly. 2013;143:w13729
Published
24.03.2013

Summary

Heart transplantation is only available for a limited number of patients with end-stage heart failure. Since the arrival of newer ventricular assist devices, mechanical circulatory support constitutes an alternative therapy for patients with advanced heart failure. The first-generation of pulsatile-flow devices were used only for bridging the sickest patients to transplantation. Frequent adverse events, limited durability and the patients’ discomfort made them unsuitable for lifetime support. The second-generation continuous-flow devices were smaller, quieter and more durable. Survival rates of patients improved significantly. This led to a marked growth of device implantations, largely caused by an increase of lifetime support. Survival of destination therapy patients is somewhat inferior to the survival of bridge-to-transplant patients, in part due to their co-morbid conditions which limit life expectancy. A subgroup of patients on destination therapy with advanced, but stable heart failure and a low-risk profile reach short-term survival rates equal or superior to the survival after heart transplantation. These patients may be offered the choice of destination therapy versus heart transplantation. However it remains unclear if long-term survival, quality of life and functional status on lifetime support can compete with the excellent results after transplantation. A trend to implanting devices at earlier stages of heart failure has begun. In a current trial, patients with advanced, but stable heart failure are randomised to destination therapy versus optimal medical therapy. The results of this trial will be expected to more precisely determine the place of mechanical circulatory support in the treatment of advanced heart failure.

 

References

  1. Stehlik J, Edwards LB, Kucheryavaya AY, Benden C, Christie JD, Dobbels F, et al. The Registry of the International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation: Twenty-eighth Adult Heart Transplant Report – 2011. J Heart Lung Transplant. 2011;30:1078–94.
  2. Oosterlee A, Rahmel A. Eurotransplant International Foundation – Annual report 2011. http://www.eurotransplant.org
  3. Swisstransplant Jahresbericht 2011. http://www.swisstransplant.org
  4. Rose EA, Gelijns AC, Moskowitz AJ, et al. Long-term use of a left ventricular assist device for end-stage heart failure. N Engl J Med. 2001;345:1435–43.
  5. El-Banayosy A, Deng M, Loisance DY, Vetter H, Gronda E, Loebe M, et al. The European experience of Novacor left ventricular assist (LVAS) therapy as a bridge to transplant: a retrospective multi-centre study. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 1999;15:835–41.
  6. Frazier OH, Rose EA, Oz MC, Dembitsky W, McCarthy P, Radovancevic B, et al. Multicenter clinical evaluation of the HeartMate vented electric left ventricular assist system in patients awaiting heart transplantation. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2001;122:1186–95.
  7. Goldstein DJ. Worldwide experience with the MicroMed DeBakey Ventricular Assist Device as a bridge to transplantation. Circulation. 2003;108(suppl1):II272–7.
  8. Frazier OH, Myers TJ, Gregoric ID, Khan T, Delgado R, Croitoru M, et al. Initial clinical experience with the Jarvik 2000 implantable axial-flow left ventricular assist system. Circulation. 2002;105:2855–60.
  9. Schmid C, Tjan TD, Etz C, Schmidt C, Wenzelburger F, Wilhelm M, et al. First clinical experience with the Incor left ventricular assist device. J Heart Lung Transplant. 2005;24:1188–94.
  10. Miller LW, Pagani FD, Russell SD, John R, Boyle AJ, Aaronson KD, et al. Use of a continuous-flow device in patients awaiting heart transplantation. N Engl J Med. 2007;357:885–96.
  11. Slaughter MS, Rogers JG, Milano CA, Russell SD, Conte JV, Feldman D, et al. Advanced heart failure treated with continuous-flow left ventricular assist device. N Engl J Med. 2009;361:2241–51.
  12. Fang JC. Rise of the machines – Left ventricular assist devices as permanent therapy for advanced heart failure. N Engl J Med. 2009;361:2282–5.
  13. Kirklin JK, Naftel DC, Kormos RL, Stevenson LW, Pagani FD, Miller MA, et al. The Fourth INTERMACS Annual Report: 4,000 implants and counting. J Heart Lung Transplant. 2012;31:117–26.
  14. McMurray JJV, Adamopoulos S, Anker SD, Auricchio A, Böhm M, Dickstein K, et al. ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure 2012. Eur Heart J. 2012;33:1787–847.
  15. Boyle AJ, Ascheim DD, Russo MJ, Kormos RL, John R, Naka Y, et al. Clinical outcomes for continuous-flow left ventricular assist device patients stratified by pre-operative INTERMACS classification. J Heart Lung Transplant. 2011;30:402–7.
  16. Slaughter MS, Meyer AL, Birks EJ. Destination therapy with left ventricular assist devices: patient selection and outcomes. Curr Opin Cardiol. 2011;26:232–6.
  17. Lietz K, Long JW, Kfoury AG, Slaughter MS, Silver MA, Milano CA, et al. Outcomes of left ventricular assist device implantation as destination therapy in the post-REMATCH era: implications for patient selection. Circulation. 2007;116:497–505.
  18. Teuteberg JJ, Ewald GA, Adamson RM, Lietz K, Miller LW, Tatooles AJ, et al. Risk assessment for continuous flow left ventricular assist devices: does the destination therapy risk score work? An analysis of over 1,000 patients. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;60:44–51.
  19. Lietz K. Destination therapy: patient selection and current outcomes. J Card Surg. 2010;25:462–71.
  20. Kirklin JK, Naftel DC, Pagani FD, Kormos RL, Stevenson L, Miller M, et al. Long-term mechanical circulatory support (destination therapy): On track to compete with heart transplantation? J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2012;144:584‒603.
  21. Jeevanandam V. Are we ready to implant left ventricular assist devices in “less sick” patients? Semin Thoracic Surg. 2012;24:8–10.
  22. Stewart GC, Stevenson LW. Keeping left ventricular assist device acceleration on track. J Am Heart Assoc. 2011;123:1559–68.
  23. Eckman P, Rosenbaum A, Vongooru H, Basraon J, Kamdar F, John R, et al. Survival of INTERMACS profile 4–6 patients after left ventricular assist device implant is improved compared to Seattle Heart Failure Model estimated survival. J Card Fail. 2011;17:S38–9.
  24. Baldwin JT, Mann DL. NHLBI’s program for VAD therapy for moderately advanced heart failure: the REVIVE-IT pilot trial. J Card Fail. 2010;16;855–8.

Most read articles by the same author(s)