Mid-term survival after continuous-flow left ventricular assist device versus heart transplantation.

There is a paucity of data about mid-term outcome of patients with advanced heart failure (HF) treated with left ventricular assist device (LVAD) in Europe, where donor shortage and their aging limit the availability and the probability of success of heart transplantation (HTx). The aim of this study is to compare Italian single-centre mid-term outcome in prospective patients treated with LVAD vs. HTx. We evaluated 213 consecutive patients with advanced HF who underwent continuous-flow LVAD implant or HTx from 1/2006 to 2/2012, with complete follow-up at 1 year (3/2013). We compared outcome in patients who received a LVAD (n = 49) with those who underwent HTx (n = 164) and in matched groups of 39 LVAD and 39 HTx patients. Patients that were treated with LVAD had a worse risk profile in comparison with HTx patients. Kaplan-Meier survival curves estimated a one-year survival of 75.5 % in LVAD vs. 82.3 % in HTx patients, a difference that was non-statistically significant [hazard ratio (HR) 1.46; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.74-2.86; p = 0.27 for LVAD vs. HTx]. After group matching 1-year survival was similar between LVAD (76.9 %) and HTx (79.5 %; HR 1.15; 95 % CI 0.44-2.98; p = 0.78). Concordant data was observed at 2-year follow-up. Patients treated with LVAD as bridge-to-transplant indication (n = 22) showed a non significant better outcome compared with HTx with a 95.5 and 90.9 % survival, at 1- and 2-year follow-up, respectively. Despite worse preoperative conditions, survival is not significantly lower after LVAD than after HTx at 2-year follow-up. Given the scarce number of donors for HTx, LVAD therapy represents a valid option, potentially affecting the current allocation strategy of heart donors also in Europe.