Outpatient follow-up during the first year after heart transplantation, is it feasible?

First year follow-up after heart transplantation requires invasive tests. Although patients used to be hospitalized for this purpose, ambulatory invasive procedures now offer the possibility of outpatient follow-up. The feasibility and security of this strategy is unknown. From 2007 we transitioned to outpatient follow-up. We have retrospectively reviewed the clinical course of the outpatient group (2007 to 2014) and an inpatient group (2000–2006). Basal characteristics, hospital stay, infections, rejection episodes and vascular complications were evaluated. 87 patients had Inpatient Follow-up (IF) and 98 Outpatient Follow-up (OF). Basal characteristics were similar, with significant differences in immunosuppression (tacrolimus IF 44.8% vs. OF 90.8%, and mycophenolate IF 86.2% vs OF 100%, both p values < 0.001) and age (IF 52 ± 11.5 years vs. OF 56.1 ± 11 years, p = 0.016). In the OF group more clinical visits were performed (IF 10 vs. OF 13, p < 0.001) while hospital stay was lower (IF 23 days vs. OF 3 days, p < 0.001). The rate of infection, rejection, and vascular complications was similar. No difference was found in 1-year mortality (IF 2.3% vs. 1.0%, p = 0.60). First year post-cardiac transplantation outpatient follow-up seems to be feasible and safe in terms of infection, rejection, vascular complications and mortality.

Outpatient follow-up during the first year after heart transplantation, is it feasible?

First year follow-up after heart transplantation requires invasive tests. Although patients used to be hospitalized for this purpose, ambulatory invasive procedures now offer the possibility of outpatient follow-up. The feasibility and security of this strategy is unknown. From 2007 we transitioned to outpatient follow-up. We have retrospectively reviewed the clinical course of the outpatient group (2007 to 2014) and an inpatient group (2000–2006). Basal characteristics, hospital stay, infections, rejection episodes and vascular complications were evaluated. 87 patients had Inpatient Follow-up (IF) and 98 Outpatient Follow-up (OF). Basal characteristics were similar, with significant differences in immunosuppression (tacrolimus IF 44.8% vs. OF 90.8%, and mycophenolate IF 86.2% vs OF 100%, both p values < 0.001) and age (IF 52 ± 11.5 years vs. OF 56.1 ± 11 years, p = 0.016). In the OF group more clinical visits were performed (IF 10 vs. OF 13, p < 0.001) while hospital stay was lower (IF 23 days vs. OF 3 days, p < 0.001). The rate of infection, rejection, and vascular complications was similar. No difference was found in 1-year mortality (IF 2.3% vs. 1.0%, p = 0.60). First year post-cardiac transplantation outpatient follow-up seems to be feasible and safe in terms of infection, rejection, vascular complications and mortality.

Comparison of 1-year outcome in patients with severe aorta stenosis treated conservatively or by aortic valve replacement or by percutaneous transcatheter aortic valve implantation (data from a multicenter Spanish registry)

The factors that influence decision making in severe aortic stenosis (AS) are unknown. Our aim was to assess, in patients with severe AS, the determinants of management and prognosis in a multicenter registry that enrolled all consecutive adults with severe AS during a 1-month period. One-year follow-up was obtained in all patients and included vital status and aortic valve intervention (aortic valve replacement [AVR] and transcatheter aortic valve implantation [TAVI]). A total of 726 patients were included, mean age was 77.3 ± 10.6 years, and 377 were women (51.8%). The most common management was conservative therapy in 468 (64.5%) followed by AVR in 199 (27.4%) and TAVI in 59 (8.1%). The strongest association with aortic valve intervention was patient management in a tertiary hospital with cardiac surgery (odds ratio 2.7, 95% confidence interval 1.8 to 4.1, p <0.001). The 2 main reasons to choose conservative management were the absence of significant symptoms (136% to 29.1%) and the presence of co-morbidity (128% to 27.4%). During 1-year follow-up, 132 patients died (18.2%). The main causes of death were heart failure (60% to 45.5%) and noncardiac diseases (46% to 34.9%). One-year survival for patients treated conservatively, with TAVI, and with AVR was 76.3%, 94.9%, and 92.5%, respectively, p <0.001. One-year survival of patients treated conservatively in the absence of significant symptoms was 97.1%. In conclusion, most patients with severe AS are treated conservatively. The outcome in asymptomatic patients managed conservatively was acceptable. Management in tertiary hospitals is associated with valve intervention. One-year survival was similar with both interventional strategies.