Waitlist and transplant outcomes in heart transplant candidates bridged with temporary endovascular right ventricular assist devices

Abstract

Background: Advances in mechanical circulatory support and changes in allocation policy have shifted waitlisting practices for heart transplantation (HT) in the United States. This analysis reports waitlist and transplant outcomes among HT candidates bridged with temporary endovascular right ventricular assist devices (tRVADs).

Methods: Patients awaiting HT from 2008 to 2022 in the United Network of Organ Sharing registry were grouped by the presence of tRVAD while waitlisted and propensity matched. Waitlist outcomes were HT and a competing outcome of death/deterioration requiring waitlist inactivation. Competing-risks regression was used to model waitlist outcomes. Subanalyses were performed to compare waitlist outcomes among patients with durable and temporary left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) with and without concomitant tRVADs. One-year posttransplant mortality was estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis.

Results: Of 41,507 HT candidates, 133 (0.3%) had tRVADs. After propensity matching, patients with tRVAD had a similar likelihood of HT and an elevated hazard for death/deterioration (hazard ratio 2.2, 95% confidence interval 1.4-3.2, p < 0.001) compared to those without tRVAD. Most patients with tRVAD (84%) had concomitant LVADs. tRVAD was associated with an elevated risk for deterioration/death among those with temporary LVADs but not durable LVADs. For patients undergoing HT, tRVAD was associated with an increased risk for 1-year mortality compared to propensity-matched recipients.

Conclusions: Bridging with tRVAD is uncommon and primarily used in patients requiring biventricular support. tRVADs are associated with waitlist inactivation or death, particularly with concomitant temporary LVAD support. As temporary devices are increasingly used as a bridge to HT, outcomes of patients with tRVADs should inform future allocation policy, particularly for candidates with biventricular failure.

Keywords: biventricular heart failure; heart allocation policy; heart transplantation; mechanical circulatory support; right ventricular assist device.