TY - JOUR
T1 - Validation of clinical scores for right ventricular failure prediction after implantation of continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices
AU - Kalogeropoulos, Andreas P.
AU - Kelkar, Anita
AU - Weinberger, Jeremy F.
AU - Morris, Alanna A.
AU - Georgiopoulou, Vasiliki V.
AU - Markham, David W.
AU - Butler, Javed
AU - Vega, J. David
AU - Smith, Andrew L.
N1 - Funding Information:
The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose. This project was partially supported by a Scientist Development Grant (No. 13SDG15960001) from the American Heart Association.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2015 International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation.
PY - 2015/12/1
Y1 - 2015/12/1
N2 - Background Several clinical prediction schemes for right ventricular failure (RVF) risk after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation have been developed in both the pulsatile- and continuous-flow LVAD eras. The performance of these models has not been evaluated systematically in a continuous-flow LVAD cohort. Methods We evaluated 6 clinical RVF prediction models (Michigan, Penn, Utah, Kormos et al, CRITT, Pittsburgh Decision Tree) in 116 patients (age 51 ± 13 years; 41.4% white and 56.0% black; 66.4% men; 56.0% bridge to transplant, 37.1% destination therapy, 17.4% bridge to decision) who received a continuous-flow LVAD (HeartMate II: 79 patients, HeartWare: 37 patients) between 2008 and 2013. Results Overall, 37 patients (31.9%) developed RVF, defined: as pulmonary vasodilator use for ≥48 hours or inotrope use for ≥14 days post-operatively; re-institution of inotropes; multi-organ failure due to RVF; or need for mechanical RV support. Median (Quartile 1 to Quartile 3) time to initial discontinuation of inotropes was 6 (range 4 to 8) days. Among scores, the Michigan score reached significance for RVF prediction but discrimination was modest (C = 0.62 [95% CI 0.52 to 0.72], p = 0.021; positive predictive value [PPV] 60.0%; negative predictive value [NPV] 75.8%), followed by CRITT (C = 0.60 [95% CI 0.50 to 0.71], p = 0.059; PPV 40.5%; NPV 72.2%). Other models did not significantly discriminate RVF. The newer, INTERMACS 3.0 definition for RVF, which includes inotropic support beyond 7 days, was reached by 57 patients (49.1%). The Kormos model performed best with this definition (C = 0.62 [95% CI 0.54 to 0.71], p = 0.005; PPV 64.3%; NPV 59.5%), followed by Penn (C = 0.61), Michigan (C = 0.60) and CRITT (C = 0.60), but overall score performance was modest. Conclusion Current schemes for post-LVAD RVF risk prediction perform only modestly when applied to external populations.
AB - Background Several clinical prediction schemes for right ventricular failure (RVF) risk after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation have been developed in both the pulsatile- and continuous-flow LVAD eras. The performance of these models has not been evaluated systematically in a continuous-flow LVAD cohort. Methods We evaluated 6 clinical RVF prediction models (Michigan, Penn, Utah, Kormos et al, CRITT, Pittsburgh Decision Tree) in 116 patients (age 51 ± 13 years; 41.4% white and 56.0% black; 66.4% men; 56.0% bridge to transplant, 37.1% destination therapy, 17.4% bridge to decision) who received a continuous-flow LVAD (HeartMate II: 79 patients, HeartWare: 37 patients) between 2008 and 2013. Results Overall, 37 patients (31.9%) developed RVF, defined: as pulmonary vasodilator use for ≥48 hours or inotrope use for ≥14 days post-operatively; re-institution of inotropes; multi-organ failure due to RVF; or need for mechanical RV support. Median (Quartile 1 to Quartile 3) time to initial discontinuation of inotropes was 6 (range 4 to 8) days. Among scores, the Michigan score reached significance for RVF prediction but discrimination was modest (C = 0.62 [95% CI 0.52 to 0.72], p = 0.021; positive predictive value [PPV] 60.0%; negative predictive value [NPV] 75.8%), followed by CRITT (C = 0.60 [95% CI 0.50 to 0.71], p = 0.059; PPV 40.5%; NPV 72.2%). Other models did not significantly discriminate RVF. The newer, INTERMACS 3.0 definition for RVF, which includes inotropic support beyond 7 days, was reached by 57 patients (49.1%). The Kormos model performed best with this definition (C = 0.62 [95% CI 0.54 to 0.71], p = 0.005; PPV 64.3%; NPV 59.5%), followed by Penn (C = 0.61), Michigan (C = 0.60) and CRITT (C = 0.60), but overall score performance was modest. Conclusion Current schemes for post-LVAD RVF risk prediction perform only modestly when applied to external populations.
KW - echocardiography
KW - heart failure
KW - left ventricular assist device
KW - right ventricle failure
KW - risk prediction model
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84951574066&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84951574066&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.healun.2015.05.005
DO - 10.1016/j.healun.2015.05.005
M3 - Article
C2 - 26123950
AN - SCOPUS:84951574066
SN - 1053-2498
VL - 34
SP - 1595
EP - 1603
JO - Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation
JF - Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation
IS - 12
ER -