Journal Article
Research Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S.
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Outcomes of adults with restrictive cardiomyopathy after heart transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Restrictive cardiomyopathy (RCM) represents a spectrum of disorders with a common physiology but divergent etiologies. RCM commonly leads to progressive heart failure and the need for heart transplantation (HTx). Pediatric RCM is a more homogeneous disorder with post-HTx outcomes comparable to those for non-RCM patients. However, post-HTx outcomes in adult RCM patients have not been studied to date.

METHODS: Demographic, clinical and survival outcomes of 38,190 adult HTx-only recipients from 1987 to 2010 were acquired from the registry of the United Network of Organ Sharing. The study population included 544 RCM patients (1.4%) and 37,646 non-RCM patients (98.6%). RCM diagnoses included idiopathic (n = 227, 42%), amyloid (n = 142, 26%), sarcoid (n = 81, 15%), radiation/chemotherapy (XRT) (n = 35, 6%) and other (n = 59, 11%).

RESULTS: Follow-up began at the time of HTx (74±64 months). During the follow-up period, 224 (41%) patients in the RCM group died, whereas 18,791 (50%) in the non-RCM group died. Crude 1-, 5- and 10-year survival for RCM patients was 84%, 66% and 45%, and for non-RCM patients was 85%, 70% and 50%, respectively. The overall unadjusted hazard ratio of RCM vs non-RCM for all-cause mortality was 1.07 (confidence interval [CI] 0.93 to 1.22). Multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression analysis yielded a hazard ratio of 1.06 (CI 0.91 to 1.25). RCM subgroup analysis showed decreased survival at 1, 5 and 10 years in the XRT (71%, 47% and 32%) and amyloid (79%, 47% and 28%) patient groups. The unadjusted hazard ratio for the XRT and amyloid subgroups vs RCM for all-cause mortality was 1.81 (p = 0.002) and 1.85 (p = 0.0004), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS: Outcomes for RCM patients post-HTx are comparable to those of non-RCM patients. However, RCM subgroup analysis suggests increased mortality for XRT and amyloid subgroups. Further analysis is warranted to understand the contributing factors.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app