This survey of publicly available information on LVAD for patients considering such therapy identified numerous flaws in the materials. All discussed benefits, few discussed surgical issues, quality of life, and complications. Some had outdated statistics, some were written above a 3rd grade level, and most did not meet international standards. Th
ALERT!
This site is not optimized for Internet Explorer 8 (or older).
Please upgrade to a newer version of Internet Explorer or use an alternate browser such as Chrome or Firefox.
VAD
September 4, 2014
The impact of continuous flow VAD on survival among patients awaiting heart transplant is not well known. Pts on the UNOS list were propensity score matched 1:2 (HeartMate II vs no VAD). Wait list mortality was 10% during the 7.5 year study. Use of a VAD improved survival to transplant at 1 (91% vs 77%) and 2 years (85% vs 68%). Use of VAD as a br
May 21, 2014
The influence of continuous flow LVAD devices on heart transplant was examined using UNOS data, comparing outcomes of cfLVAD to pulsatile flow LVAD (pfLVAD) and no LVAD pts. cfLVAD pts spent longer time on the waitlist and were status IA for longer than either of the other groups. Waitlist survival was better for the cfLVAD pts. Post-transplant s