Effect of Left Ventricular Assist Device Infection on Post-transplant Outcomes
Background In this study, we sought to confirm which types of device-related infections impact bridge-to-transplant rates. We also aimed to determine the effect of device-related infections on post-transplant survival and post-transplant infection. Methods We retrospectively reviewed paper and elect...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | The Journal of heart and lung transplantation 2009-03, Vol.28 (3), p.237-242 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 242 |
---|---|
container_issue | 3 |
container_start_page | 237 |
container_title | The Journal of heart and lung transplantation |
container_volume | 28 |
creator | Schulman, Allison R., BA Martens, Timothy P., MD Russo, Mark J., MD, MS Christos, Paul J., MPH, MS Gordon, Rachel J., MD, MPH Lowy, Franklin D., MD Oz, Mehmet C., MD Naka, Yoshifumi, MD, PhD |
description | Background In this study, we sought to confirm which types of device-related infections impact bridge-to-transplant rates. We also aimed to determine the effect of device-related infections on post-transplant survival and post-transplant infection. Methods We retrospectively reviewed paper and electronic medical records for 149 patients undergoing left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation as a bridge to transplantation at the Columbia Presbyterian Medical Center between 2000 and 2006. The primary outcome measures were survival to transplantation, post-transplant infection and post-transplant survival. Results Patients with sepsis were less likely to be successfully bridged to cardiac transplantation (7 of 22 vs 103 of 127, 31.8% vs 81.1%, p = 0.01). However, if transplanted, their survival rates at 1 year were not decreased (6 of 7 vs 85 of 103, 85.7% vs 82.5%, p = 1.00). No other pre-transplant device-related infection affected post-transplant survival at 1 year (22 of 27 vs 69 of 83, 81.5% vs 83.1%, p = 1.00). Pre-transplant drive-line infections predicted post-transplant infection in former drive-line or pocket sites (11 of 16 vs 14 of 94, 68.8% vs 14.9%, p = 0.01) and increased overall post-transplant hospital length of stay (16 vs 19 days, p = 0.04). They did not, however, affect post-transplant survival at 1 year (22 of 25 vs 69 of 85, 88% vs 81.2%, p = 0.56). Conclusions Although survival to transplantation was diminished in LVAD patients with sepsis, if successfully transplanted, post-transplant survival was unaffected. Patients with local device infections and signs of early sepsis may warrant evaluation for urgent transplantation. A pre-transplant drive-line infection was associated with post-transplant infection in either the former pocket or drive-line site, and increased overall length of stay, but it did not decrease post-transplant survival. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.healun.2008.12.007 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_67035385</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S1053249808017476</els_id><sourcerecordid>67035385</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c511t-e6e1173bb1868ef15160ae1502785c14f3f91b765ee8ab5df6d135fe1ffe10bd3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkV2L1DAUhoMo7rr6D0R6o3etOUmTdm6EZXfVhcEV_LgNaXqCGTvpmJMu7L83ZQYFb4RAcvGcNy_PYewl8AY46Le75gfaaYmN4LxvQDScd4_YOSjV1RKge1zeXMlatJv-jD0j2nHOhVTiKTuDjeiVhvacfbrxHl2uZl9t0efqO8acglsmm6pLokC5usb74LC6jSsY5liV83mmXOdkIx0mG3N1t2Q375GesyfeToQvTvcF-_b-5uvVx3p79-H26nJbOwWQa9RYGsphgF736EGB5hZBcdH1ykHrpd_A0GmF2NtBjV6PIJVHKGWBD6O8YG-OuYc0_1qQstkHcjiVMjgvZHTHpZK9KmB7BF2aiRJ6c0hhb9ODAW5Wj2Znjh7N6tGAMMVjGXt1yl-GPY5_h07iCvD6BFhydvJFhQv0hxMg-hK-cu-OHBYb9wGTIRcwOhxDKjrNOIf_Nfk3wE0hhvLnT3xA2s1LisW0AUNlwHxZd76unJf_u7bT8jfh5KeJ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>67035385</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Effect of Left Ventricular Assist Device Infection on Post-transplant Outcomes</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)</source><creator>Schulman, Allison R., BA ; Martens, Timothy P., MD ; Russo, Mark J., MD, MS ; Christos, Paul J., MPH, MS ; Gordon, Rachel J., MD, MPH ; Lowy, Franklin D., MD ; Oz, Mehmet C., MD ; Naka, Yoshifumi, MD, PhD</creator><creatorcontrib>Schulman, Allison R., BA ; Martens, Timothy P., MD ; Russo, Mark J., MD, MS ; Christos, Paul J., MPH, MS ; Gordon, Rachel J., MD, MPH ; Lowy, Franklin D., MD ; Oz, Mehmet C., MD ; Naka, Yoshifumi, MD, PhD</creatorcontrib><description>Background In this study, we sought to confirm which types of device-related infections impact bridge-to-transplant rates. We also aimed to determine the effect of device-related infections on post-transplant survival and post-transplant infection. Methods We retrospectively reviewed paper and electronic medical records for 149 patients undergoing left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation as a bridge to transplantation at the Columbia Presbyterian Medical Center between 2000 and 2006. The primary outcome measures were survival to transplantation, post-transplant infection and post-transplant survival. Results Patients with sepsis were less likely to be successfully bridged to cardiac transplantation (7 of 22 vs 103 of 127, 31.8% vs 81.1%, p = 0.01). However, if transplanted, their survival rates at 1 year were not decreased (6 of 7 vs 85 of 103, 85.7% vs 82.5%, p = 1.00). No other pre-transplant device-related infection affected post-transplant survival at 1 year (22 of 27 vs 69 of 83, 81.5% vs 83.1%, p = 1.00). Pre-transplant drive-line infections predicted post-transplant infection in former drive-line or pocket sites (11 of 16 vs 14 of 94, 68.8% vs 14.9%, p = 0.01) and increased overall post-transplant hospital length of stay (16 vs 19 days, p = 0.04). They did not, however, affect post-transplant survival at 1 year (22 of 25 vs 69 of 85, 88% vs 81.2%, p = 0.56). Conclusions Although survival to transplantation was diminished in LVAD patients with sepsis, if successfully transplanted, post-transplant survival was unaffected. Patients with local device infections and signs of early sepsis may warrant evaluation for urgent transplantation. A pre-transplant drive-line infection was associated with post-transplant infection in either the former pocket or drive-line site, and increased overall length of stay, but it did not decrease post-transplant survival.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1053-2498</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1557-3117</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.healun.2008.12.007</identifier><identifier>PMID: 19285614</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York, NY: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Anesthesia. Intensive care medicine. Transfusions. Cell therapy and gene therapy ; Biological and medical sciences ; Cardiology. Vascular system ; Emergency and intensive cardiocirculatory care. Cardiogenic shock. Coronary intensive care ; Female ; Heart Transplantation - mortality ; Heart-Assist Devices - adverse effects ; Humans ; Intensive care medicine ; Male ; Medical sciences ; Middle Aged ; Prosthesis-Related Infections - epidemiology ; Prosthesis-Related Infections - etiology ; Retrospective Studies ; Surgery ; Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases ; Surgery of the heart ; Survival Rate</subject><ispartof>The Journal of heart and lung transplantation, 2009-03, Vol.28 (3), p.237-242</ispartof><rights>International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation</rights><rights>2009 International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation</rights><rights>2009 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c511t-e6e1173bb1868ef15160ae1502785c14f3f91b765ee8ab5df6d135fe1ffe10bd3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c511t-e6e1173bb1868ef15160ae1502785c14f3f91b765ee8ab5df6d135fe1ffe10bd3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.healun.2008.12.007$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3550,27924,27925,45995</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=21280164$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19285614$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Schulman, Allison R., BA</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Martens, Timothy P., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Russo, Mark J., MD, MS</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Christos, Paul J., MPH, MS</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gordon, Rachel J., MD, MPH</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lowy, Franklin D., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Oz, Mehmet C., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Naka, Yoshifumi, MD, PhD</creatorcontrib><title>Effect of Left Ventricular Assist Device Infection on Post-transplant Outcomes</title><title>The Journal of heart and lung transplantation</title><addtitle>J Heart Lung Transplant</addtitle><description>Background In this study, we sought to confirm which types of device-related infections impact bridge-to-transplant rates. We also aimed to determine the effect of device-related infections on post-transplant survival and post-transplant infection. Methods We retrospectively reviewed paper and electronic medical records for 149 patients undergoing left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation as a bridge to transplantation at the Columbia Presbyterian Medical Center between 2000 and 2006. The primary outcome measures were survival to transplantation, post-transplant infection and post-transplant survival. Results Patients with sepsis were less likely to be successfully bridged to cardiac transplantation (7 of 22 vs 103 of 127, 31.8% vs 81.1%, p = 0.01). However, if transplanted, their survival rates at 1 year were not decreased (6 of 7 vs 85 of 103, 85.7% vs 82.5%, p = 1.00). No other pre-transplant device-related infection affected post-transplant survival at 1 year (22 of 27 vs 69 of 83, 81.5% vs 83.1%, p = 1.00). Pre-transplant drive-line infections predicted post-transplant infection in former drive-line or pocket sites (11 of 16 vs 14 of 94, 68.8% vs 14.9%, p = 0.01) and increased overall post-transplant hospital length of stay (16 vs 19 days, p = 0.04). They did not, however, affect post-transplant survival at 1 year (22 of 25 vs 69 of 85, 88% vs 81.2%, p = 0.56). Conclusions Although survival to transplantation was diminished in LVAD patients with sepsis, if successfully transplanted, post-transplant survival was unaffected. Patients with local device infections and signs of early sepsis may warrant evaluation for urgent transplantation. A pre-transplant drive-line infection was associated with post-transplant infection in either the former pocket or drive-line site, and increased overall length of stay, but it did not decrease post-transplant survival.</description><subject>Anesthesia. Intensive care medicine. Transfusions. Cell therapy and gene therapy</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Cardiology. Vascular system</subject><subject>Emergency and intensive cardiocirculatory care. Cardiogenic shock. Coronary intensive care</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Heart Transplantation - mortality</subject><subject>Heart-Assist Devices - adverse effects</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Intensive care medicine</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Prosthesis-Related Infections - epidemiology</subject><subject>Prosthesis-Related Infections - etiology</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>Surgery</subject><subject>Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases</subject><subject>Surgery of the heart</subject><subject>Survival Rate</subject><issn>1053-2498</issn><issn>1557-3117</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2009</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkV2L1DAUhoMo7rr6D0R6o3etOUmTdm6EZXfVhcEV_LgNaXqCGTvpmJMu7L83ZQYFb4RAcvGcNy_PYewl8AY46Le75gfaaYmN4LxvQDScd4_YOSjV1RKge1zeXMlatJv-jD0j2nHOhVTiKTuDjeiVhvacfbrxHl2uZl9t0efqO8acglsmm6pLokC5usb74LC6jSsY5liV83mmXOdkIx0mG3N1t2Q375GesyfeToQvTvcF-_b-5uvVx3p79-H26nJbOwWQa9RYGsphgF736EGB5hZBcdH1ykHrpd_A0GmF2NtBjV6PIJVHKGWBD6O8YG-OuYc0_1qQstkHcjiVMjgvZHTHpZK9KmB7BF2aiRJ6c0hhb9ODAW5Wj2Znjh7N6tGAMMVjGXt1yl-GPY5_h07iCvD6BFhydvJFhQv0hxMg-hK-cu-OHBYb9wGTIRcwOhxDKjrNOIf_Nfk3wE0hhvLnT3xA2s1LisW0AUNlwHxZd76unJf_u7bT8jfh5KeJ</recordid><startdate>20090301</startdate><enddate>20090301</enddate><creator>Schulman, Allison R., BA</creator><creator>Martens, Timothy P., MD</creator><creator>Russo, Mark J., MD, MS</creator><creator>Christos, Paul J., MPH, MS</creator><creator>Gordon, Rachel J., MD, MPH</creator><creator>Lowy, Franklin D., MD</creator><creator>Oz, Mehmet C., MD</creator><creator>Naka, Yoshifumi, MD, PhD</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><general>Elsevier</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20090301</creationdate><title>Effect of Left Ventricular Assist Device Infection on Post-transplant Outcomes</title><author>Schulman, Allison R., BA ; Martens, Timothy P., MD ; Russo, Mark J., MD, MS ; Christos, Paul J., MPH, MS ; Gordon, Rachel J., MD, MPH ; Lowy, Franklin D., MD ; Oz, Mehmet C., MD ; Naka, Yoshifumi, MD, PhD</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c511t-e6e1173bb1868ef15160ae1502785c14f3f91b765ee8ab5df6d135fe1ffe10bd3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2009</creationdate><topic>Anesthesia. Intensive care medicine. Transfusions. Cell therapy and gene therapy</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Cardiology. Vascular system</topic><topic>Emergency and intensive cardiocirculatory care. Cardiogenic shock. Coronary intensive care</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Heart Transplantation - mortality</topic><topic>Heart-Assist Devices - adverse effects</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Intensive care medicine</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Prosthesis-Related Infections - epidemiology</topic><topic>Prosthesis-Related Infections - etiology</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>Surgery</topic><topic>Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases</topic><topic>Surgery of the heart</topic><topic>Survival Rate</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Schulman, Allison R., BA</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Martens, Timothy P., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Russo, Mark J., MD, MS</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Christos, Paul J., MPH, MS</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gordon, Rachel J., MD, MPH</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lowy, Franklin D., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Oz, Mehmet C., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Naka, Yoshifumi, MD, PhD</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>The Journal of heart and lung transplantation</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Schulman, Allison R., BA</au><au>Martens, Timothy P., MD</au><au>Russo, Mark J., MD, MS</au><au>Christos, Paul J., MPH, MS</au><au>Gordon, Rachel J., MD, MPH</au><au>Lowy, Franklin D., MD</au><au>Oz, Mehmet C., MD</au><au>Naka, Yoshifumi, MD, PhD</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Effect of Left Ventricular Assist Device Infection on Post-transplant Outcomes</atitle><jtitle>The Journal of heart and lung transplantation</jtitle><addtitle>J Heart Lung Transplant</addtitle><date>2009-03-01</date><risdate>2009</risdate><volume>28</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>237</spage><epage>242</epage><pages>237-242</pages><issn>1053-2498</issn><eissn>1557-3117</eissn><abstract>Background In this study, we sought to confirm which types of device-related infections impact bridge-to-transplant rates. We also aimed to determine the effect of device-related infections on post-transplant survival and post-transplant infection. Methods We retrospectively reviewed paper and electronic medical records for 149 patients undergoing left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation as a bridge to transplantation at the Columbia Presbyterian Medical Center between 2000 and 2006. The primary outcome measures were survival to transplantation, post-transplant infection and post-transplant survival. Results Patients with sepsis were less likely to be successfully bridged to cardiac transplantation (7 of 22 vs 103 of 127, 31.8% vs 81.1%, p = 0.01). However, if transplanted, their survival rates at 1 year were not decreased (6 of 7 vs 85 of 103, 85.7% vs 82.5%, p = 1.00). No other pre-transplant device-related infection affected post-transplant survival at 1 year (22 of 27 vs 69 of 83, 81.5% vs 83.1%, p = 1.00). Pre-transplant drive-line infections predicted post-transplant infection in former drive-line or pocket sites (11 of 16 vs 14 of 94, 68.8% vs 14.9%, p = 0.01) and increased overall post-transplant hospital length of stay (16 vs 19 days, p = 0.04). They did not, however, affect post-transplant survival at 1 year (22 of 25 vs 69 of 85, 88% vs 81.2%, p = 0.56). Conclusions Although survival to transplantation was diminished in LVAD patients with sepsis, if successfully transplanted, post-transplant survival was unaffected. Patients with local device infections and signs of early sepsis may warrant evaluation for urgent transplantation. A pre-transplant drive-line infection was associated with post-transplant infection in either the former pocket or drive-line site, and increased overall length of stay, but it did not decrease post-transplant survival.</abstract><cop>New York, NY</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>19285614</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.healun.2008.12.007</doi><tpages>6</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1053-2498 |
ispartof | The Journal of heart and lung transplantation, 2009-03, Vol.28 (3), p.237-242 |
issn | 1053-2498 1557-3117 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_67035385 |
source | MEDLINE; Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier) |
subjects | Anesthesia. Intensive care medicine. Transfusions. Cell therapy and gene therapy Biological and medical sciences Cardiology. Vascular system Emergency and intensive cardiocirculatory care. Cardiogenic shock. Coronary intensive care Female Heart Transplantation - mortality Heart-Assist Devices - adverse effects Humans Intensive care medicine Male Medical sciences Middle Aged Prosthesis-Related Infections - epidemiology Prosthesis-Related Infections - etiology Retrospective Studies Surgery Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases Surgery of the heart Survival Rate |
title | Effect of Left Ventricular Assist Device Infection on Post-transplant Outcomes |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-22T13%3A30%3A49IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Effect%20of%20Left%20Ventricular%20Assist%20Device%20Infection%20on%20Post-transplant%20Outcomes&rft.jtitle=The%20Journal%20of%20heart%20and%20lung%20transplantation&rft.au=Schulman,%20Allison%20R.,%20BA&rft.date=2009-03-01&rft.volume=28&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=237&rft.epage=242&rft.pages=237-242&rft.issn=1053-2498&rft.eissn=1557-3117&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.healun.2008.12.007&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E67035385%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=67035385&rft_id=info:pmid/19285614&rft_els_id=S1053249808017476&rfr_iscdi=true |