Cargando…
Results of heart transplantation in the urgent recipient - who should be transplanted?
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate immediate and long-term results of cardiac transplantation at two different levels of urgency. METHODS: From November 2003 to December 2012, 228 patients underwent cardiac transplantation. Children and patients in cardiogenic shock were excluded from the study. From the final...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Sociedade Brasileira de Cirurgia Cardiovascular
2014
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4412329/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25372913 http://dx.doi.org/10.5935/1678-9741.20140072 |
_version_ | 1782368645466292224 |
---|---|
author | Prieto, David Correia, Pedro Antunes, Pedro Batista, Manuel Antunes, Manuel J. |
author_facet | Prieto, David Correia, Pedro Antunes, Pedro Batista, Manuel Antunes, Manuel J. |
author_sort | Prieto, David |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: To evaluate immediate and long-term results of cardiac transplantation at two different levels of urgency. METHODS: From November 2003 to December 2012, 228 patients underwent cardiac transplantation. Children and patients in cardiogenic shock were excluded from the study. From the final group (n=212), 58 patients (27%) were hospitalized under inotropic support (Group A), while 154 (73%) were awaiting transplantation at home (Group B). Patients in Group A were younger (52.0±11.3 vs. 55.2±10.4 years, P=0.050) and had shorter waiting times (29.4±43.8 vs. 48.8±45.2 days; P=0.006). No difference was found for sex or other comorbidities. Haemoglobin was lower and creatinine higher in Group A. The characteristics of the donors were similar. Follow-up was 4.5±2.7 years. RESULTS: No differences were found in time of ischemia (89.1±37.0 vs. 91.5±34.5 min, P=0.660) or inotropic support (13.8% vs. 11.0%, P=0.579), neither in the incidence of cellular or humoral rejection and of cardiac allograft vasculopathy. De novo diabetes de novo in the first year was slightly higher in Group A (15.5% vs. 11.7%, P=0.456), and these patients were at increased risk of serious infection (22.4% vs. 12.3%, P=0.068). Hospital mortality was similar (3.4% vs. 4.5%, P=0.724), as well as long-term survival (7.8±0.5 vs. 7.4±0.3 years). CONCLUSIONS: The results obtained in patients hospitalized under inotropic support were similar to those of patients awaiting transplantation at home. Allocation of donors to the first group does not seem to compromise the benefit of transplantation. These results may not be extensible to more critical patients. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4412329 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2014 |
publisher | Sociedade Brasileira de Cirurgia Cardiovascular |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-44123292015-04-30 Results of heart transplantation in the urgent recipient - who should be transplanted? Prieto, David Correia, Pedro Antunes, Pedro Batista, Manuel Antunes, Manuel J. Rev Bras Cir Cardiovasc Review Articles OBJECTIVE: To evaluate immediate and long-term results of cardiac transplantation at two different levels of urgency. METHODS: From November 2003 to December 2012, 228 patients underwent cardiac transplantation. Children and patients in cardiogenic shock were excluded from the study. From the final group (n=212), 58 patients (27%) were hospitalized under inotropic support (Group A), while 154 (73%) were awaiting transplantation at home (Group B). Patients in Group A were younger (52.0±11.3 vs. 55.2±10.4 years, P=0.050) and had shorter waiting times (29.4±43.8 vs. 48.8±45.2 days; P=0.006). No difference was found for sex or other comorbidities. Haemoglobin was lower and creatinine higher in Group A. The characteristics of the donors were similar. Follow-up was 4.5±2.7 years. RESULTS: No differences were found in time of ischemia (89.1±37.0 vs. 91.5±34.5 min, P=0.660) or inotropic support (13.8% vs. 11.0%, P=0.579), neither in the incidence of cellular or humoral rejection and of cardiac allograft vasculopathy. De novo diabetes de novo in the first year was slightly higher in Group A (15.5% vs. 11.7%, P=0.456), and these patients were at increased risk of serious infection (22.4% vs. 12.3%, P=0.068). Hospital mortality was similar (3.4% vs. 4.5%, P=0.724), as well as long-term survival (7.8±0.5 vs. 7.4±0.3 years). CONCLUSIONS: The results obtained in patients hospitalized under inotropic support were similar to those of patients awaiting transplantation at home. Allocation of donors to the first group does not seem to compromise the benefit of transplantation. These results may not be extensible to more critical patients. Sociedade Brasileira de Cirurgia Cardiovascular 2014 /pmc/articles/PMC4412329/ /pubmed/25372913 http://dx.doi.org/10.5935/1678-9741.20140072 Text en http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Review Articles Prieto, David Correia, Pedro Antunes, Pedro Batista, Manuel Antunes, Manuel J. Results of heart transplantation in the urgent recipient - who should be transplanted? |
title | Results of heart transplantation in the urgent recipient - who should be
transplanted? |
title_full | Results of heart transplantation in the urgent recipient - who should be
transplanted? |
title_fullStr | Results of heart transplantation in the urgent recipient - who should be
transplanted? |
title_full_unstemmed | Results of heart transplantation in the urgent recipient - who should be
transplanted? |
title_short | Results of heart transplantation in the urgent recipient - who should be
transplanted? |
title_sort | results of heart transplantation in the urgent recipient - who should be
transplanted? |
topic | Review Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4412329/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25372913 http://dx.doi.org/10.5935/1678-9741.20140072 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT prietodavid resultsofhearttransplantationintheurgentrecipientwhoshouldbetransplanted AT correiapedro resultsofhearttransplantationintheurgentrecipientwhoshouldbetransplanted AT antunespedro resultsofhearttransplantationintheurgentrecipientwhoshouldbetransplanted AT batistamanuel resultsofhearttransplantationintheurgentrecipientwhoshouldbetransplanted AT antunesmanuelj resultsofhearttransplantationintheurgentrecipientwhoshouldbetransplanted |