Adjuvant Use of Ivabradine in Acute Heart Failure due to Myocarditis

We report two cases of young men in whom acute heart failure due to myocarditis was diagnosed. The patients had been transferred to the intensive care unit (ICU) with commencing symptoms of acute heart failure and consecutive multiorgan failure for further treatment and to evaluate the indication for implantation of a ventricular assist device or for high urgent orthotopic heart transplantation. In both patients, the If-channel inhibitor ivabradine was administered off-label to provide selective heart rate reduction, and thus support hemodynamic stabilization. Though currently considered off-label use in patients suffering from severe hypotension and acute heart failure, the use of ivabradine may beneficially influence outcome by allowing optimization of the patient's heart rate concomitant to initial measures of clinical stabilization

Heart re-transplantation in Eurotransplant

Internationally 3% of the donor hearts are distributed to re-transplant patients. In Eurotransplant, only patients with a primary graft dysfunction (PGD) within 1 week after heart transplantation (HTX) are indicated for high urgency listing. The aim of this study is to provide evidence for the discussion on whether these patients should still be allocated with priority. All consecutive HTX performed in the period 1981-2015 were included. Multivariate Cox' model was built including: donor and recipient age and gender, ischaemia time, recipient diagnose, urgency status and era. The study population included 18 490 HTX, of these 463 (2.6%) were repeat transplants. The major indications for re-HTX were cardiac allograft vasculopathy (CAV) (50%), PGD (26%) and acute rejection (21%). In a multivariate model, compared with first HTX hazards ratio and 95% confidence interval for repeat HTX were 2.27 (1.83-2.82) for PGD, 2.24 (1.76-2.85) for acute rejection and 1.22 (1.00-1.48) for CAV (P < 0.0001). Outcome after cardiac re-HTX strongly depends on the indication for re-HTX with acceptable outcomes for CAV. In contrast, just 47.5% of all hearts transplanted in patients who were re-transplanted for PGD still functioned at 1-month post-transplant. Alternative options like VA-ECMO should be first offered before opting for acute re-transplantation

Trust in the Transplant Team Associated With the Level of Chronic Illness Management—A Secondary Data Analysis of the International BRIGHT Study

A trustful relationship between transplant patients and their transplant team (interpersonal trust) is essential in order to achieve positive health outcomes and behaviors. We aimed to 1) explore variability of trust in transplant teams; 2) explore the association between the level of chronic illness management and trust; 3) investigate the relationship of trust on behavioral outcomes. A secondary data analysis of the BRIGHT study (ID: NCT01608477; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01608477?id=NCT01608477&amp;rank=1) was conducted, including multicenter data from 36 heart transplant centers from 11 countries across four different continents. A total of 1,397 heart transplant recipients and 100 clinicians were enrolled. Trust significantly varied among the transplant centers. Higher levels of chronic illness management were significantly associated with greater trust in the transplant team (patients: AOR= 1.85, 95% CI = 1.47–2.33, p &lt; 0.001; clinicians: AOR = 1.35, 95% CI = 1.07–1.71, p = 0.012). Consultation time significantly moderated the relationship between chronic illness management levels and trust only when clinicians spent ≥30 min with patients. Trust was significantly associated with better diet adherence (OR = 1.34, 95%CI = 1.01–1.77, p = 0.040). Findings indicate the relevance of trust and chronic illness management in the transplant ecosystem to achieve improved transplant outcomes. Thus, further investment in re-engineering of transplant follow-up toward chronic illness management, and sufficient time for consultations is required

Immunosuppression with tacrolimus early after orthotopic heart transplantation: a comparison of prograf and advagraf

We compared trough levels and clinical outcomes in patients who received Prograf or Advagraf (tacrolimus) de novo following heart transplantation surgery. Eighty-two patients were included in this follow-up study. Biopsy results were controlled for the first 3 months after orthotopic heart transplantation. Trough levels were monitored for 4 weeks: daily during the first 7 days and once every week thereafter. The lengths of stay in the hospital and in intensive care were compared. The end point of the study was the 1-year mortality rate. We found significant differences between the groups for both biopsy results and trough levels. Trough levels differed for the first 5 days and then converged on the sixth day. The levels remained comparable throughout the monitoring period. The 1-year mortality rates for Prograf and Advagraf were 20% and 15%, respectively. Trough levels were comparable after an adjustment period. There were no differences between the 2 groups in their 1-year mortality rates. These results suggest that Advagraf is a safe alternative to Prograf for patients who have undergone heart transplantation

Five-year results of heart rate control with ivabradine or metoprolol succinate in patients after heart transplantation

Background!#!Cardiac graft denervation causes inadequate sinus tachycardia in patients after heart transplantation (HTX) which is associated with reduced survival. This study investigated the 5-year results of heart rate control with ivabradine or metoprolol succinate in patients after HTX.!##!Methods!#!This registry study analyzed 104 patients receiving either ivabradine (n = 50) or metoprolol succinate (n = 54) within 5 years after HTX. Analysis included patient characteristics, medication, echocardiographic features, cardiac catheterization data, cardiac biomarkers, heart rates, and post-transplant survival including causes of death.!##!Results!#!Demographics and post-transplant medication revealed no significant differences except for ivabradine and metoprolol succinate use. At 5-year follow-up, patients with ivabradine had a significantly lower heart rate (73.3 bpm) compared to baseline (88.6 bpm; P &amp;lt; 0.01) and to metoprolol succinate (80.4 bpm; P &amp;lt; 0.01), a reduced left ventricular mass (154.8 g) compared to baseline (179.5 g; P &amp;lt; 0.01) and to metoprolol succinate (177.3 g; P &amp;lt; 0.01), a lower left ventricular end-diastolic pressure (LVEDP; 12.0 mmHg) compared to baseline (15.5 mmHg; P &amp;lt; 0.01) and to metoprolol succinate (17.1 mmHg; P &amp;lt; 0.01), and a reduced NT-proBNP level (525.4 pg/ml) compared to baseline (3826.3 pg/ml; P &amp;lt; 0.01) and to metoprolol succinate (1038.9 pg/ml; P &amp;lt; 0.01). Five-year post-transplant survival was significantly better in patients with ivabradine (90.0%) versus metoprolol succinate (68.5%; P &amp;lt; 0.01).!##!Conclusion!#!Patients receiving ivabradine showed a superior heart rate reduction and a better left ventricular diastolic function along with an improved 5-year survival after HTX

Everolimus in Heart Transplantation: An Update

The evidence base relating to the use of everolimus in heart transplantation has expanded considerably in recent years, providing clinically relevant information regarding its use in clinical practice. Unless there are special considerations to take into account, all de novo heart transplant patients can be regarded as potential candidates for immunosuppression with everolimus and reduced-exposure calcineurin inhibitor therapy. Caution about the use of everolimus immediately after transplantation should be exercised in certain patients with the risk of severe proteinuria, with poor wound healing, or with uncontrolled severe hyperlipidemia. Initiation of everolimus in the early phase aftertransplant is not advisable in patients with severe pretransplant end-organ dysfunction or in patients on a left ventricular assist device beforetransplant who are at high risk of infection or of wound healing complications. The most frequent reason for introducing everolimus in maintenance heart transplant patients is to support minimization or withdrawal of calcineurin inhibitor therapy, for example, due to impaired renal function or malignancy. Due to its potential to inhibit the progression of cardiac allograft vasculopathy and to reduce cytomegalovirus infection, everolimus should be initiated as soon as possible after heart transplantation. Immediate and adequate reduction of CNI exposure is mandatory from the start of everolimus therapy