4.5 Article

Clinical outcomes after cardiac transplantation in muscular dystrophy patients

期刊

JOURNAL OF HEART AND LUNG TRANSPLANTATION
卷 29, 期 4, 页码 432-438

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.healun.2009.08.030

关键词

cardiomyopathy; muscular dystrophy; outcome data; retrospective study; transplantation

资金

  1. NHLBI NIH HHS [K08 HL076440] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NATIONAL HEART, LUNG, AND BLOOD INSTITUTE [K08HL076440] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BACKGROUND: Patients with muscular dystrophy are at risk of developing a dilated cardiomyopathy and can progress to advanced heart failure. At present, it is not known whether such patients can safely undergo cardiac transplantation. METHODS: This was a retrospective review of the Cardiac Transplant Research Database, a multi-institutional registry of 29 transplant centers in the United States, from the years 1990 to 2005. The post-cardiac transplant outcomes of 29 patients with muscular dystrophy were compared with 275 non-muscular dystrophy patients with non-ischemic cardiomyopathy, matched for age, body mass index, gender, and race. RESULTS: Becker's muscular dystrophy was present in 52% of the patients. Survival in the muscular dystrophy patients was similar to the controls at 1 year (89% vs 91%; p = 0.5) and at 5 years (83% vs 78%; p =- 0.5). The differences in rates of cumulative infection, rejection, or allograft vasculopathy between the 2 groups were not significant (p > 0.5 for all comparisons). CONCLUSIONS: Recognizing the limitations of the present investigation (ie, selection bias and data lacking in the functional capacity of the muscular dystrophy patients), the current study suggests that the clinical outcomes after cardiac transplantation in selected patients with muscular dystrophy are similar to those seen in age-matched patients with non-ischemic cardiomyopathy. J Heart Lung Transplant 2010;29:432-438 (C) 2010 International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据