The modified US heart allocation system improves transplant rates and decreases status upgrade utilization for patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy

Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy: From Medical Treatment to Advanced Heart Failure Therapies

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

There has been much debate surrounding novel medical therapies and heart transplantation listing challenges in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM).

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent clinical trials led to FDA approval of mavacamten (a cardiac myosin inhibitor), offering symptom relief and potentially delaying/avoiding invasive septal reduction therapies for some patients with HCM and left ventricular outflow obstruction (LVOTO). For those with refractory symptoms and end-stage heart failure, heart transplantation remains the gold standard. However, the concern for the organ allocation system failing to prioritize those individuals persists. HCM is a heterogeneous genetic condition with variable penetration and clinical presentation. Even though a large portion of patients remain asymptomatic, an important minority develops debilitating symptoms refractory to medical therapy. Post-HT short- and long-term outcomes are favorable. However, HT waitlist mortality remains high. For highly selected patients with HCM, a left ventricular assist device is a viable option.

Impact of the New Heart Allocation System on the Medium-Term Outcomes in Patients With Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy

The introduction of the new heart allocation system in the United States in 2018 resulted in an increase in the number of heart transplants (HT) performed among patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM). However, whether that affected medium-term post-HT outcomes in this group of patients remains unknown. We conducted an analysis of the United Network for Organ Sharing Transplant Database, including adults with HCM who underwent heart transplantation between 2015 and 2021. Patients were divided into two equal-duration eras: Era 1 (October 17, 2015, to October 17, 2018) and Era 2 (October 18, 2018, to October 18, 2021). In the studied period, 444 patients with HCM underwent HT: 204 in Era 1 and 240 in Era 2. In Era 2, the waitlist time was shorter, transplant rates were higher, patients were less frequently supported with inotropes but more often with an IABP, ischemic time was longer, and donor-to-recipient distance larger. Pre- and post-transplant functional status was comparable across the two eras, while the pre-HT employment rate was higher in the new system. The 3 year survival was unchanged across eras. In the new allocation system, despite more frequent mechanical circulatory support (MCS) use and increased ischemic time, the medium-term outcomes of patients with HCM remained favorable.

2024 AHA/ACC/AMSSM/HRS/PACES/SCMR Guideline for the Management of Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy: A Report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2024 AHA/ACC/AMSSM/HRS/PACES/SCMR Guideline for the Management of Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy" provides recommendations to guide clinicians in the management of patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from September 14, 2022, to November 22, 2022, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. Additional relevant studies, published through May 23, 2023, during the guideline writing process, were also considered by the writing committee and added to the evidence tables, where appropriate.

STRUCTURE

Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy remains a common genetic heart disease reported in populations globally. Recommendations from the "2020 AHA/ACC Guideline for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Patients With Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy" have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians.

2024 AHA/ACC/AMSSM/HRS/PACES/SCMR Guideline for the Management of Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy: A Report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2024 AHA/ACC/AMSSM/HRS/PACES/SCMR Guideline for the Management of Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy" provides recommendations to guide clinicians in the management of patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from September 14, 2022, to November 22, 2022, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. Additional relevant studies, published through May 23, 2023, during the guideline writing process, were also considered by the writing committee and added to the evidence tables, where appropriate.

STRUCTURE

Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy remains a common genetic heart disease reported in populations globally. Recommendations from the "2020 AHA/ACC Guideline for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Patients With Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy" have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians.

Prognosis after heart transplant in patients with hypertrophic and restrictive cardiomyopathy. A nationwide registry analysis

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

Posttransplant outcomes among recipients with a diagnosis of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) or restrictive cardiomyopathy (RCM) remain controversial.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of a nationwide registry of first-time recipients undergoing isolated heart transplant between 1984 and 2021. One-year and 5-year mortality in recipients with HCM and RCM were compared with those with dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM).

RESULTS

We included 3703 patients (3112 DCM; 331 HCM; 260 RCM) with a median follow-up of 5.0 [3.1-5.0] years. Compared with DCM, the adjusted 1-year mortality risk was: HCM: HR, 1.38; 95%CI, 1.07-1.78; P=.01, RCM: HR, 1.48; 95%CI, 1.14-1.93; P=.003. The adjusted 5-year mortality risk was: HCM: HR, 1.17; 95%CI, 0.93-1.47; P=.18; RCM: HR, 1.52; 95%CI, 1.22-1.89; P<.001. Over the last 20 years, the RCM group showed significant improvement in 1-year survival (adjusted R2=0.95) and 5-year survival (R2=0.88); the HCM group showed enhanced the 5-year survival (R2=0.59), but the 1-year survival remained stable (R2=0.16).

CONCLUSIONS

Both RCM and HCM were linked to a less favorable early posttransplant prognosis compared with DCM. However, at the 5-year mark, this unfavorable difference was evident only for RCM. Notably, a substantial temporal enhancement in both early and late mortality was observed for RCM, while for HCM, this improvement was mainly evident in late mortality.

Long-term post-transplantation outcomes in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: Single-center 35-year experience

BACKGROUND

Heart transplantation (HT) is the only option for most patients with end-stage heart failure and hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) who fail medical therapy. Data on the long-term outcomes post-transplant in HCM individuals remain scarce.

METHODS

We analyzed data of 319 adult patients who underwent HT between 1984 and 2019. Patients were followed for cardiac allograft rejection, cardiac allograft vasculopathy (CAV), death, or re-transplantation.

RESULTS

Outcomes of 24 patients with HCM, 160 with ischemic, and 135 with dilated cardiomyopathy were compared. During a mean follow-up of 11.6 ± 7.2 (max 27.8), 16.7 ± 8.2 (max 32.7), and 16.1 ± 9.7 (max 34.6) years after HT in hypertrophic, ischemic, and dilated cardiomyopathy groups, respectively: 10-year survival rate was 67%, 62%, 69%, respectively (p = .04). Post-transplantation, HCM individuals more often than the other two studied groups required prolonged inotropic support (37%, 12%, 17%, respectively, p = .02), temporary mechanical circulatory support (45%, 13%, 14%, respectively, p < .01), and renal replacement therapy immediately post-HT (55%, 19%, 24%, respectively, p < .01). No significant inter-group differences were noted in the 10-year freedom from acute allograft rejection (38%, 46%, 43%, respectively, p = .38) or 10-year freedom from CAV (88%, 78%, 81%, respectively, p = .57).

CONCLUSIONS

The long-term post-transplant prognosis of adult patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy is favorable despite more challenging immediate post-HT course.

Waitlist Trends in Heart-Liver Transplantation With Updated US Heart Allocation System

BACKGROUND

In October 2018, the United States implemented a change in the donor heart allocation policy from a three-tiered to a six-tiered status system. The purpose of the current study was to examine changes in waitlist patterns among patients listed for concomitant heart-liver transplantation with implementation of the new allocation system.

METHODS

Patients listed for heart-liver transplantation between January 1, 2012, and June 30, 2021, were identified from the United Network for Organ Sharing database. Patients were grouped by era according to initial list date before or after October 18, 2018. Competing risks regression for mortality, transplantation, removal from waitlist due to illness was performed according to the method of Fine and Gray. Waitlist data were censored at 3 years from initial listing.

RESULTS

Overall, 523 patients were identified, of whom 310 were listed before (era 1, 59%) and 213 after (era 2, 41%) allocation change. Patients in era 1 were older, had more restrictive cardiomyopathy, and more preoperative inotrope use (all P < .05). However, patients in era 2 has longer ischemic times (3.5 ± 1.1 vs 3.1 ± 1.1 hours, P < .01) and more intraaortic balloon pump use (8.9% vs 3.9%, P = .016). Era 2 was associated with lower subdistribution hazard for death (hazard ratio 0.37; 95% CI, 0.13-1.02; P = .054) and increased transplantation (hazard ratio 1.35; 95% CI, 1.06-1.72; P = .015).

CONCLUSIONS

The implementation of the US donor heart allocation policy was associated with more preoperative intraaortic balloon pump use for patients listed for heart-liver transplantation. Despite that, the modern era was associated with lower waitlist mortality and more frequent transplantation, without increased risk of delisting due to illness.

Comparison of Intraaortic Balloon Pump and Impella 5.5 as Heart Transplant Bridging Strategies

BACKGROUND

Temporary mechanical circulatory support is increasingly utilized as a bridge to heart transplantation. The Impella 5.5 (Abiomed) has achieved anecdotal success as a bridge since receiving US Food and Drug Administration approval. The purpose of the current study was to compare waitlist and posttransplant outcomes of patients bridged with intraaortic balloon pumps (IABPs) to those receiving Impella 5.5 therapy.

METHODS

Patients listed for heart transplantation between October 2018 and December 2021 who received IABP or Impella 5.5 at any time during waitlist course were identified from the United Network for Organ Sharing database. Propensity-matched groups of recipients with each device were created. Competing-risks regression for mortality, transplantation, and removal from waitlist for illness was performed according to the method of Fine and Gray. Posttransplant survival was censored at 2 years.

RESULTS

Overall, 2936 patients were identified, of whom 2484 (85%) were supported with IABP and 452 (15%) received Impella 5.5. Patients with Impella 5.5 support had more functional impairment, higher wedge pressures, higher rates of preoperative diabetes and dialysis, and more ventilator support (all P < .05). Waitlist mortality was significantly worsened in the Impella group and transplantation was less frequent (P < .001). However, survival at 2 years after transplant was similar in both complete (90% vs 90%, P = .693) and propensity-matched cohorts (88% vs 83%, P = .874).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients bridged with Impella 5.5 were sicker than IABP-bridged patients and less frequently transplanted; however, posttransplant outcomes were similar in propensity-matched cohorts. The role of these bridging strategies in patients listed for heart transplantation should be continually assessed with future allocation system changes.

Challenges with the current United Network for Organ Sharing heart allocation system

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The revised United States heart organ allocation system was launched in October 2018. In this review, we summarize this United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) policy and describe intended and unintended consequences.

RECENT FINDINGS

Although early studies published after the change suggested postheart transplant survival declined at 6 months and 1 year, recent publications with longer follow-up time have confirmed comparable posttransplant survival in adjusted models and several patient cohorts. Moreover, the new allocation decreased overall waitlist time from 112 to 39 days ( P  < 0.001). Mean ischemic time increased because of greater distances traveled to acquire donor hearts under broader sharing. Despite the intention to decrease exception requests by expanding the number of priority tiers to provide more granular risk stratification, ∼30% of patients remain waitlisted under exception status. Left-ventricular assist device (LVAD) implants are declining and the number of LVAD patients on the transplant list has decreased dramatically after the allocation system change.

SUMMARY

As the next allocation system is developed, it is imperative to curtail the use of temporary mechanical support as a strategy solely for listing purposes, identify attributes that more clearly stratify the severity of illness, provide greater oversight of exception requests, and address concerns regarding patients with durable LVADs.

Familial Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy: Diagnosis and Management

Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) is widely recognized as one of the most common inheritable cardiac disorders. Since its initial description over 60 years ago, advances in multimodality imaging and translational genetics have revolutionized our understanding of the disorder. The diagnosis and management of patients with HCM are optimized with a multidisciplinary approach. This, along with increased safety and efficacy of medical, percutaneous, and surgical therapies for HCM, has afforded more personalized care and improved outcomes for this patient population. In this review, we will discuss our modern understanding of the molecular pathophysiology that underlies HCM. We will describe the range of clinical presentations and discuss the role of genetic testing in diagnosis. Finally, we will summarize management strategies for the hemodynamic subtypes of HCM with specific emphasis on the rationale and evidence for the use of implantable cardioverter defibrillators, septal reduction therapy, and cardiac myosin inhibitors.