Gender and Race Differences in HeartMate3 Left Ventricular Assist Device as a Bridge to Transplantation

Rebecca S Steinberg; Alexis K Okoh; Jeffrey Wang; Krishan J Patel; Apoorva Gangavelli; Aditi Nayak; Yi-An Ko; Divya Gupta; Mani Daneshmand; J David Vega; Alanna A Morris

doi:10.1016/j.jchf.2023.11.008

Gender and Race Differences in HeartMate3 Left Ventricular Assist Device as a Bridge to Transplantation

JACC Heart Fail. 2023 Dec 14:S2213-1779(23)00760-6. doi: 10.1016/j.jchf.2023.11.008. Online ahead of print.

Authors

Affiliations

¹ Division of Cardiology, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
² Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
³ Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
⁴ Division of Surgery, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
⁵ Division of Cardiology, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, USA. Electronic address: aamorr3@emory.edu.

PMID: 38180429
DOI: 10.1016/j.jchf.2023.11.008

Abstract

Background: Gender and racial disparities exist after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation. Compared with older devices, the HeartMate 3 (HM3) (Abbott Cardiovascular) has demonstrated improved survival. Whether HM3 differentially improves outcomes by gender or race and ethnic groups is unknown.

Objectives: The purpose of this study is to examine differences by gender and race in the use of HM3 among patients listed for heart transplantation (HT) and associated waitlist and post-transplant outcomes.

Methods: The authors examined all patients (20% women, 33% Black) who received LVADs as bridge to transplantation (BTT) between January 2018 and June 2020, in the OPTN (Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network) database. Trends in use of HM3 were evaluated by gender and race. Competing events of death/delisting and transplantation were evaluated using subdistribution hazard models. Post-transplant outcomes were evaluated using multivariate logistic regression adjusted for demographic, clinical, and donor characteristics.

Results: Of 11,524 patients listed for HT during the study period, 955 (8.3%) had HM3 implanted as BTT. Use of HM3 increased for all patients, with no difference in use by gender (P = 0.4) or by race (P = 0.2). Competing risk analysis did not demonstrate differences in transplantation or death/delisting in men compared with women (HT: adjusted HR [aHR]: 0.92 [95% CI: 0.70-1.21]; death/delisting: aHR: 0.91 [95% CI: 0.59-1.42]), although Black patients were transplanted fewer times than White patients (HT: aHR: 0.72 [95% CI: 0.57-0.91], death/delisting: aHR: 1.36 [95% CI: 0.98-1.89]). One-year post-transplant survival was comparable by gender (aHR: 0.52 [95% CI: 0.21-1.70]) and race (aHR: 0.76 [95% CI: 0.34-1.70]), with no differences in rates of stroke, acute rejection, or graft failure.

Conclusions: Use of HM3 among patients listed for HT has increased over time and by gender and race. Black patients with HM3 were less likely to be transplanted compared with White patients, but there were no differences in post-transplant outcomes between these groups or between men and women.

Keywords: HeartMate3; bridge to transplant; disparities; gender; heart failure; left ventricular assist device; race.