Ahad Firoz, Roh Yanagida, Mohammed Kashem, Yoshiya Toyoda, Eman Hamad
{"title":"评估原发性心力衰竭病因对心脏移植结果的影响","authors":"Ahad Firoz, Roh Yanagida, Mohammed Kashem, Yoshiya Toyoda, Eman Hamad","doi":"10.1111/ctr.15450","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>There are diverse indications for heart transplantation (HTx), often categorized into ischemic (ICM) and nonischemic (NICM) cardiomyopathy. Although there is extensive research comparing the outcomes for these disease processes following certain therapeutic interventions, there are limited data on how recipient etiology impacts post-HTx survival. Our investigation seeks to identify this relationship.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We conducted a retrospective analysis using adult HTx patients from the United Network for Organ Sharing database between 2000 and 2021. Patients with a combined heart–lung transplant or previous HTx were excluded. ICM included coronary artery disease (CAD) and ischemic dilated cardiomyopathy. NICM included nonischemic dilated (NIDCM), hypertrophic (HCM), and restrictive (RCM) cardiomyopathy. Overall survival was analyzed using Kaplan–Meier curves, log-rank tests, and multivariable Cox regression models.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>A total of 42 268 patients were included in our study. Recipients with ICM were older and more likely to be males, obese, diabetics, and smokers. We found that patients with ICM had an increased incidence of transplant CAD (OR = 1.23, <i>p </i>< 0.001) and risk of mortality (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.22, <i>p</i> < 0.001) compared to NICM. When NICM was expanded, RCM had a similar hazard risk compared to ICM (HR = 1.03, <i>p</i> = 0.650), whereas both NIDCM (HR = 0.81, <i>p</i> < 0.001) and HCM (HR = 0.70, <i>p</i> < 0.001) had improved survival.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>Our study provides evidence to suggest that ICM has decreased survival when compared to NICM. When NICM was expanded, RCM was found to have an increased mortality risk similar to ICM, whereas NIDCM and HCM both had superior outcomes. The clinical implication of this investigation will allow clinicians to better understand the prognosis of certain patient groups.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":10467,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Transplantation","volume":"38 9","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessing the Role of Primary Heart Failure Etiology on Cardiac Transplant Outcomes\",\"authors\":\"Ahad Firoz, Roh Yanagida, Mohammed Kashem, Yoshiya Toyoda, Eman Hamad\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/ctr.15450\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Background</h3>\\n \\n <p>There are diverse indications for heart transplantation (HTx), often categorized into ischemic (ICM) and nonischemic (NICM) cardiomyopathy. Although there is extensive research comparing the outcomes for these disease processes following certain therapeutic interventions, there are limited data on how recipient etiology impacts post-HTx survival. Our investigation seeks to identify this relationship.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>We conducted a retrospective analysis using adult HTx patients from the United Network for Organ Sharing database between 2000 and 2021. Patients with a combined heart–lung transplant or previous HTx were excluded. ICM included coronary artery disease (CAD) and ischemic dilated cardiomyopathy. NICM included nonischemic dilated (NIDCM), hypertrophic (HCM), and restrictive (RCM) cardiomyopathy. Overall survival was analyzed using Kaplan–Meier curves, log-rank tests, and multivariable Cox regression models.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>A total of 42 268 patients were included in our study. Recipients with ICM were older and more likely to be males, obese, diabetics, and smokers. We found that patients with ICM had an increased incidence of transplant CAD (OR = 1.23, <i>p </i>< 0.001) and risk of mortality (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.22, <i>p</i> < 0.001) compared to NICM. When NICM was expanded, RCM had a similar hazard risk compared to ICM (HR = 1.03, <i>p</i> = 0.650), whereas both NIDCM (HR = 0.81, <i>p</i> < 0.001) and HCM (HR = 0.70, <i>p</i> < 0.001) had improved survival.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\\n \\n <p>Our study provides evidence to suggest that ICM has decreased survival when compared to NICM. When NICM was expanded, RCM was found to have an increased mortality risk similar to ICM, whereas NIDCM and HCM both had superior outcomes. The clinical implication of this investigation will allow clinicians to better understand the prognosis of certain patient groups.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10467,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Transplantation\",\"volume\":\"38 9\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Transplantation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ctr.15450\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Transplantation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ctr.15450","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Assessing the Role of Primary Heart Failure Etiology on Cardiac Transplant Outcomes
Background
There are diverse indications for heart transplantation (HTx), often categorized into ischemic (ICM) and nonischemic (NICM) cardiomyopathy. Although there is extensive research comparing the outcomes for these disease processes following certain therapeutic interventions, there are limited data on how recipient etiology impacts post-HTx survival. Our investigation seeks to identify this relationship.
Methods
We conducted a retrospective analysis using adult HTx patients from the United Network for Organ Sharing database between 2000 and 2021. Patients with a combined heart–lung transplant or previous HTx were excluded. ICM included coronary artery disease (CAD) and ischemic dilated cardiomyopathy. NICM included nonischemic dilated (NIDCM), hypertrophic (HCM), and restrictive (RCM) cardiomyopathy. Overall survival was analyzed using Kaplan–Meier curves, log-rank tests, and multivariable Cox regression models.
Results
A total of 42 268 patients were included in our study. Recipients with ICM were older and more likely to be males, obese, diabetics, and smokers. We found that patients with ICM had an increased incidence of transplant CAD (OR = 1.23, p < 0.001) and risk of mortality (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.22, p < 0.001) compared to NICM. When NICM was expanded, RCM had a similar hazard risk compared to ICM (HR = 1.03, p = 0.650), whereas both NIDCM (HR = 0.81, p < 0.001) and HCM (HR = 0.70, p < 0.001) had improved survival.
Conclusion
Our study provides evidence to suggest that ICM has decreased survival when compared to NICM. When NICM was expanded, RCM was found to have an increased mortality risk similar to ICM, whereas NIDCM and HCM both had superior outcomes. The clinical implication of this investigation will allow clinicians to better understand the prognosis of certain patient groups.
期刊介绍:
Clinical Transplantation: The Journal of Clinical and Translational Research aims to serve as a channel of rapid communication for all those involved in the care of patients who require, or have had, organ or tissue transplants, including: kidney, intestine, liver, pancreas, islets, heart, heart valves, lung, bone marrow, cornea, skin, bone, and cartilage, viable or stored.
Published monthly, Clinical Transplantation’s scope is focused on the complete spectrum of present transplant therapies, as well as also those that are experimental or may become possible in future. Topics include:
Immunology and immunosuppression;
Patient preparation;
Social, ethical, and psychological issues;
Complications, short- and long-term results;
Artificial organs;
Donation and preservation of organ and tissue;
Translational studies;
Advances in tissue typing;
Updates on transplant pathology;.
Clinical and translational studies are particularly welcome, as well as focused reviews. Full-length papers and short communications are invited. Clinical reviews are encouraged, as well as seminal papers in basic science which might lead to immediate clinical application. Prominence is regularly given to the results of cooperative surveys conducted by the organ and tissue transplant registries.
Clinical Transplantation: The Journal of Clinical and Translational Research is essential reading for clinicians and researchers in the diverse field of transplantation: surgeons; clinical immunologists; cryobiologists; hematologists; gastroenterologists; hepatologists; pulmonologists; nephrologists; cardiologists; and endocrinologists. It will also be of interest to sociologists, psychologists, research workers, and to all health professionals whose combined efforts will improve the prognosis of transplant recipients.