Association Between "Unacceptable Condition" Expressed in Palliative Care Consultation Before Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation and Care Received at the End of Life

CONTEXT

Palliative care consultation before left ventricular assist device (LVAD) surgery (PreVAD) has been recommended, but its impact on goal-concordant care is unknown.

OBJECTIVES

To describe the association between patients' unique unacceptable condition articulated during PreVAD with the actual care provided at the end of life.

METHODS

Among 308 patients who had PreVAD between 2014 and 2019, 72 patients died before December 31, 2019. Based on the answers to the question, "Is there any condition you would find unacceptable?" patients were divided into ARTICULATE (those who could articulate their unacceptable condition clearly, n = 58) and non-ARTICULATE (those who could not, n = 14). Circumstances at death and end-of-life care were compared between groups.

RESULTS

Mean age at death was 63.2 years (SD ±13.1), 56 patients (77.8%) were males, and median duration of LVAD was 167.5 days (interquartile range 682). ARTICULATE patients died less frequently in the intensive care unit than non-ARTICULATE patients (33 patients, 57.9% vs. 13 patients, 92.9%; P = 0.014) and had ethics consultation less frequently (four patients, 6.9% vs. five patients, 35.7%; P = 0.011). Frequency of LVAD withdrawal was similar in both groups. Among ARTICULATE cohort, the unacceptable condition articulated in PreVAD did not seem to influence decisions at the end of life.

CONCLUSION

Patients who articulated their unacceptable condition clearly before LVAD surgery had less frequent ethics consultations and received less intensive care at the end of life, but it did not seem to affect the decision of LVAD withdrawal. It may be more important to engage in discussions around their unacceptable conditions, rather than the specific condition articulated. The question of an unacceptable condition should be part of any routine palliative care consultation before LVAD surgery.

Palliative Care Consultation in Cardiogenic Shock Requiring Short-Term Mechanical Circulatory Support: A Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Little is known about palliative care consultation (PCC) for patients with cardiogenic shock requiring short-term mechanical circulatory support (STMCS).

OBJECTIVE

To describe the utilization of PCC in this population.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study in a university medical center intensive care unit (ICU).

SETTING/PARTICIPANTS

In total, 195 patients aged >18 years with cardiogenic shock requiring STMCS were included. The cohort was divided into three categories: no PCC, early PCC (within seven days of STMCS), and late PCC (eight or more days after STMCS). Follow-up occurred during the index hospitalization.

RESULTS

Mean age was 59.3 ± 13.9 years; 67.9% were men. Mean follow-up period was 33.8 ± 37.7 days. Overall inpatient mortality was 52.3%. Ninety-four patients (48.2%) received PCC; 49 (25.1%) and 45 (23.1%) received early and late PCCs, respectively. STMCS duration, ICU stay after STMCS, and hospital stay after STMCS were significantly shorter in the no PCC group than the early PCC group (4 vs. 12 days, p < 0.001; 11 vs. 19 days, p = 0.004; and 16 vs. 19 days, p = 0.031; respectively). ICU stay after STMCS and hospital stay after STMCS were significantly shorter in the early PCC group than the late PCC group (19 vs. 38 days, p < 0.001; 19 vs. 49 days, p < 0.001; respectively). However, time from initial PCC to discharge was not significantly different between early and late PCC groups (18 vs. 31 days, p = 0.13).

CONCLUSIONS

PCC was utilized in almost half of patients with cardiogenic shock requiring STMCS. PCC tends to occur toward the end of life regardless of the duration of STMCS. The optimal PCC timing remained unclear.