CLINICAL RESEARCH: CLINICAL TRIAL
Chronic Mechanical Circulatory Support for Inotrope-Dependent Heart Failure Patients Who Are Not Transplant CandidatesResults of the INTrEPID Trial
Joseph G. Rogers, MD, FACC*,1,*,
Javed Butler, MD, FACC ,2,
Steven L. Lansman, MD, PhD ,
Alan Gass, MD, FACC ,
Peer M. Portner, PhD, FACC||,3,
Michael K. Pasque, MD#,4,
Richard N. Pierson, III, MD, FACC**,5 for the INTrEPID Investigators
* Cardiovascular Medicine Division, Duke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina
Division of Cardiology, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia
Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Westchester Medical Center, Valhalla, New York
Division of Cardiology, Beth Israel Medical Center, New York, New York
|| Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Stanford University, Palo Alto, California
# Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri
** Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, University of Maryland Medical Center and Baltimore Veterans Administration Medical Center, Baltimore, Maryland.
Manuscript received October 10, 2006;
revised manuscript received March 22, 2007,
accepted March 28, 2007.
* Reprint requests and correspondence: Dr. Joseph G. Rogers, Medical Director, Cardiac Transplant and Mechanical Circulatory Support Program, Box 3034, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina 27710. (Email: joseph.rogers{at}duke.edu).
Objectives: This study evaluated the impact of left ventricular assist device (LVAD) support on survival and quality of life in inotrope-dependent heart failure patients ineligible for cardiac transplantation.
Background: The role for LVADs as a bridge to cardiac transplantation has been established, but data supporting their role as permanent therapy in nontransplant candidates are limited.
Methods: The INTrEPID (Investigation of Nontransplant-Eligible Patients Who Are Inotrope Dependent) trial was a prospective, nonrandomized clinical trial comparing LVAD with optimal medical therapy (OMT). Fifty-five patients with New York Heart Association functional class IV symptoms who failed weaning from inotropic support were offered a Novacor LVAD. Eighteen of these patients did not receive an LVAD owing to patient preference (n = 14) or unavailability of the device (n = 4) but consented to follow-up and constitute a contemporaneous control group.
Results: The LVAD and OMT patients were well matched for demographic and disease severity measures, except OMT patients had a lower mean serum sodium (128 mg/dl vs. 134 mg/dl; p = 0.001) and a higher mean blood urea nitrogen concentration (59 vs. 40; p = 0.02). The LVAD-treated patients had superior survival rates at 6 months (46% vs. 22%; p = 0.03) and 12 months (27% vs. 11%; p = 0.02). Adverse event rates were higher in the OMT group. Eighty-five percent of the LVAD-treated patients had minimal or no heart failure symptoms. Five LVAD patients and 1 OMT patient improved sufficiently while on therapy to qualify for cardiac transplantation.
Conclusions: Inotrope-dependent heart failure patients who are ineligible for transplantation have a high short-term mortality rate and derive a significant survival advantage from "destination" mechanical circulatory support.
|
Abbreviations and Acronyms
| | CVA = cerebrovascular accident | | LVAD = left ventricular assist device | | NYHA = New York Heart Association | | OMT = optimal medical therapy | | TIA = transient ischemic attack |
|
Related Articles
-
Inside This Issue of JACC
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2007 50: A33-A34.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
-
On the Fledgling Field of Mechanical Circulatory Support
- Lynne Warner Stevenson and Gregory Couper
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2007 50: 748-751.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
|
|
 
J. F. Antaki
Insanity of Left Ventricular Assist Therapy: Doing the Same Thing and Expecting Different Results
Circ Heart Fail,
November 1, 2011;
4(6):
680 - 681.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. Suarez, C. B. Patel, G. M. Felker, R. Becker, A. F. Hernandez, and J. G. Rogers
Mechanisms of Bleeding and Approach to Patients With Axial-Flow Left Ventricular Assist Devices
Circ Heart Fail,
November 1, 2011;
4(6):
779 - 784.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. S. Slaughter, G. A. Giridharan, D. Tamez, J. LaRose, M. A. Sobieski, L. Sherwood, and S. C. Koenig
Transapical miniaturized ventricular assist device: Design and initial testing
J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg.,
September 1, 2011;
142(3):
668 - 674.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
L. W. Miller
Left Ventricular Assist Devices Are Underutilized
Circulation,
April 12, 2011;
123(14):
1552 - 1558.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
G. C. Stewart and L. W. Stevenson
Keeping Left Ventricular Assist Device Acceleration on Track
Circulation,
April 12, 2011;
123(14):
1559 - 1568.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. Komoda, T. Drews, R. Hetzer, and H. B. Lehmkuhl
Adult candidates for heart transplantation with larger body surface area have better prognosis on waiting list after progression to critically ill status
Eur J Cardiothorac Surg,
March 1, 2011;
39(3):
317 - 322.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
V. K. Topkara, S. Kondareddy, F. Malik, I.- W. Wang, D. L. Mann, G. A. Ewald, and N. Moazami
Infectious Complications in Patients With Left Ventricular Assist Device: Etiology and Outcomes in the Continuous-Flow Era
Ann. Thorac. Surg.,
October 1, 2010;
90(4):
1270 - 1277.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
L. H. Lund, J. Matthews, and K. Aaronson
Patient selection for left ventricular assist devices
Eur J Heart Fail,
May 1, 2010;
12(5):
434 - 443.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. G. Rogers, K. D. Aaronson, A. J. Boyle, S. D. Russell, C. A. Milano, F. D. Pagani, B. S. Edwards, S. Park, R. John, J. V. Conte, et al.
Continuous Flow Left Ventricular Assist Device Improves Functional Capacity and Quality of Life of Advanced Heart Failure Patients
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.,
April 27, 2010;
55(17):
1826 - 1834.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. H. Zambroski, P. Combs, S. N. Cronin, and C. Pfeffer
Edgar Allan Poe, "The Pit and the Pendulum," and Ventricular Assist Devices
Crit. Care Nurse,
December 1, 2009;
29(6):
29 - 39.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
E. A. Genovese, M. A. Dew, J. J. Teuteberg, M. A. Simon, J. Kay, M. P. Siegenthaler, J. K. Bhama, C. A. Bermudez, K. L. Lockard, S. Winowich, et al.
Incidence and Patterns of Adverse Event Onset During the First 60 Days After Ventricular Assist Device Implantation
Ann. Thorac. Surg.,
October 1, 2009;
88(4):
1162 - 1170.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. P. Kalogeropoulos, V. V. Georgiopoulou, G. Giamouzis, A. L. Smith, S. A. Agha, S. Waheed, S. Laskar, J. Puskas, S. Dunbar, D. Vega, et al.
Utility of the Seattle Heart Failure Model in Patients With Advanced Heart Failure
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.,
January 27, 2009;
53(4):
334 - 342.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. Meyns, F. Rega, J. Ector, W. Droogne, J. Vanhaecke, J. Van Hemelrijck, B. Griffith, R. Dowling, M. Zucker, and D. Burkhoff
Partial left ventricular support implanted through minimal access surgery as a bridge to cardiac transplant.
J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg.,
January 1, 2009;
137(1):
243 - 245.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. F. Hernandez, A. M. Shea, C. A. Milano, J. G. Rogers, B. G. Hammill, C. M. O'Connor, K. A. Schulman, E. D. Peterson, and L. H. Curtis
Long-term Outcomes and Costs of Ventricular Assist Devices Among Medicare Beneficiaries
JAMA,
November 26, 2008;
300(20):
2398 - 2406.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Struber, K. Sander, J. Lahpor, H. Ahn, P.-Y. Litzler, S. G. Drakos, F. Musumeci, C. Schlensak, I. Friedrich, R. Gustafsson, et al.
HeartMate II left ventricular assist device; early European experience
Eur J Cardiothorac Surg,
August 1, 2008;
34(2):
289 - 294.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
L. W. Stevenson and G. Couper
On the Fledgling Field of Mechanical Circulatory Support
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.,
August 21, 2007;
50(8):
748 - 751.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
