HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Personal Folders Download to citation manager Author home page(s): Daniel Zimpfer Michael Grimm Ernst Wolner Georg M. Wieselthaler Permission Requests Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Sandner, S. E. Articles by Wieselthaler, G. M. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Sandner, S. E. Articles by Wieselthaler, G. M. Related Collections Mechanical Circulatory Assistance

---

Original Articles: Adult Cardiac

Renal Function and Outcome After Continuous Flow Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation

^a Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
^b Department of Cardiothoracic Anesthesia, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria

Accepted for publication January 6, 2009.

^_* Address correspondence to Dr Sandner, Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, A, Vienna, 1090, Austria (Email: sigrid.sandner{at}meduniwien.ac.at).

Background: Renal dysfunction as a risk factor with the use of left ventricular assist devices (LVAD) is controversial. We determined the effect of renal function on outcomes after continuous flow LVAD implantation.

Methods: Eighty-six patients with advanced heart failure undergoing continuous flow LVAD implantation as bridge to transplantation from November 1998 to July 2007 were retrospectively analyzed. Renal function was assessed using the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease study–derived glomerular filtration rates (GFR [mL · min^–1 · 1.73 m^–2]). Patients were categorized into two groups based on pre-LVAD GFR: those with normal renal function (GFR > 60, n = 46), and those with renal dysfunction (GFR < 60, n = 40).

Results: Post-LVAD survival at 1, 3, and 6 months for GFR greater than 60 was 91.3%, 79.9%, 72.6%, respectively, and for GFR less than 60, it was 92.5%, 66.5%, 47.9%, respectively (p = 0.038). Bridge-to-transplant rate was lower for GFR less than 60 than for GFR greater than 60 (40.0% versus 63.0%, p = 0.033). For GFR less than 60, GFR improved on LVAD support: implant to month 6, 41.7 ± 11.5 to 62.7 ± 25.0 (p = 0.021). Post-LVAD survival was improved in GFR less than 60 patients who after LVAD implantation recovered renal function to GFR greater than 60 (p < 0.001). Patients with post-LVAD renal failure had significantly lower post-LVAD survival regardless of pre-LVAD renal function (p < 0.001).

Conclusions: Patients with renal dysfunction have poorer outcomes after continuous flow LVAD implantation. However, renal function improves after LVAD implantation and is associated with improved survival. Our data underscore the importance of end-organ function in patient selection for LVAD therapy.