JTCS Click here to go to SJM website.
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Personal Folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Permission Requests
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Related Collections
Right arrowRelated Article

J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2008;135:154-155
© 2008 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery


Cardiothoracic Transplantation

Discussion

The first 20% of the full text of this article appears below.

David N. Campbell (Denver, Colo). Obviously you and your coauthors have put a lot of work and effort into this very impressive study, which does cover a large number of pediatric and young adults. We actually use 18 and under for pediatric age, so there are some young adults in this "pediatric" group, but 3500 patients is an impressive number of patients over a decade between 1995 and 2005. These were all transplanted and then entered into the UNOS database. Again, this consists of a great deal of time and effort to get this information. I have two comments and then two questions.

As you pointed out well in the manuscript, in pediatric heart transplant recipients, PVR is not an identifier for poor outcome and poor survival as it is in adults. This is something that gets lost sometimes in the pediatric patient group.

You have re-emphasized that the predictors of pretransplant clinical status remain a significant predictor of poor outcomes and, as you have pointed out, these are hospitalization, intensive care unit care, mechanical ventilation, and particularly ECMO support. All of these portend a very poor outcome.

I think the message to be taken from this is that earlier intervention in the pediatric group is warranted, and we are far behind the adults in terms of using ventricular assist devices. I know Columbia, particularly, is a large user of those, and I know that you have already set out a scale very much like you have used for this pediatric group. I think it is very important that the pediatric heart transplant surgeons begin to use mechanical assist devices much earlier. We are obviously coming onto that scene later . . . [Full Text of this Article]


Related Article

Predicting survival among high-risk pediatric cardiac transplant recipients: An analysis of the United Network for Organ Sharing database
Ryan R. Davies, Mark J. Russo, Seema Mital, Timothy M. Martens, Robert S. Sorabella, Kimberly N. Hong, Annetine C. Gelijns, Alan J. Moskowitz, Jan M. Quaegebeur, Ralph S. Mosca, and Jonathan M. Chen
J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 2008 135: 147-155. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]






HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
ANN THORAC SURG ASIAN CARDIOVASC THORAC ANN EUR J CARDIOTHORAC SURG
J THORAC CARDIOVASC SURG ICVTS ALL CTSNet JOURNALS
Copyright © 2008 by The American Association for Thoracic Surgery.