ICVTS Click here to goto Smart Canula website
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Published on August 7, 2009, doi:10.1510/icvts.2009.210518

Interactive CardioVascular and Thoracic Surgery 2009;9:807.

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (Journal Format PDF)
Right arrow eComments: Submit
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eComments are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Personal Folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Permission Requests
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Januszewska, K.
Right arrow Articles by Reichart, B.
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Januszewska, K.
Right arrow Articles by Reichart, B.
Related Collections
Right arrow Mechanical Circulatory Assistance
Right arrow Transplantation - heart

Assisted circulation

Ventricular assist device as a bridge to heart transplantation in children

Katarzyna Januszewska 1*, Edward Malec 1, Julia Birnbaum 1, Markus Loeff 1, Ralf Sodian 1, Christoph Schmitz 1, Heinrich Netz 1, Bruno Reichart 1

1 Ludwig Maximilians University, Munich, Germany

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: mijanusz{at}cyf-kr.edu.pl.


   Abstract
The ventricular assist device (VAD) is a life-saving option for patients in heart failure refractory for conventional therapy. The aim of study was to assess the influence of VAD on heart transplantation (HT) outcome in children <16 years. Between October 1988 and August 2008, 73 children underwent HT: Group 1 (n=9) who received VAD as bridge to HT (left ventricular - 4, biventricular - 5), and Group 2 (n=64), without previous VAD. Diagnoses included cardiomyopathy (n=50 (68.5%)) and congenital heart defects (n=23 (31.5%)). Retrospective analysis of perioperative and long-term follow-up data was performed. The mean follow-up was 7.22±4.7 years. The diagnosis of cardiomyopathy appeared more often in Group 1 (p=0.074), but the difference was not significant. The two groups did not differ with respect to age (p=0.123) and weight (p=0.183). Mortality in long follow-up was: 11.1% (n=1) in Group 1 and 14.1% (n=9) in Group 2 (p=0.782). Analysis of preoperative end-organs function did not reveal significant differences between groups. There was also no significant differences with respect to awaiting time for transplant (p=0.948), postoperative ventilatory support time (p=0.677), duration of hospital stay (p=0.711) and incidence of acute rejection episodes (p=0.156). VAD used as a bridge for HT in children does not negatively influence the outcome. Keywords: Ventricular assist device; Pediatric heart transplantation; End-organ function





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
ANN THORAC SURG ASIAN CARDIOVASC THORAC ANN EUR J CARDIOTHORAC SURG
J THORAC CARDIOVASC SURG ICVTS ALL CTSNet JOURNALS
Copyright © 2009 European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery