Background

The impact of telehealth on cardiovascular care during the COVID-19 pandemic on patient satisfaction and factors associated with satisfaction are not well characterized.

Methods

We conducted a nonrandomized, prospective cross-sectional survey study for outpatient telehealth cardiovascular visits over a 169-day period utilizing a validated telehealth usability questionnaire. For each variable, patients were divided into 2 groups-1 with scores above the median, labeled "greater satisfaction," and the other with scores below the median, labeled "less satisfaction."

Results

A total of 13,913 outpatient telehealth encounters were successfully completed during the study period. A total of 7327 unique patients were identified and received a survey invitation; 5993 (81.8%) patients opened the invitation, and 1034 (14.1%) patients consented and completed the survey. Overall mean and median scores were 3.15 (standard deviation 0.74) and 3.37 (interquartile range 2.73-3.68) (maximum score 4.00). Greater satisfaction was noted among younger patients (mean age 63.3 ± 14.0 years, P = .005), female gender (46.3%, P = .007), non-White ethnicity (24.2% P = .006), self-identified early adopters and innovators of new technology (49.8%, P < .001), 1-way travel time greater than 1 hour (22.3%, P < .001), 1-way travel distance greater than 10 miles (49.0%, P < .001), patients needing child care arrangement (16.4%, P < .001), and history of orthotopic heart transplant (OHT) (5.1%, P = .04).

Conclusion

Patients reported overall satisfaction with telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic. Factors associated with patient convenience, along with female gender, younger age, and non-White ethnicity, correlated with greater satisfaction. Cardiovascular comorbidities did not correlate with greater satisfaction except for OHT. Further research into the impact of telehealth on patient satisfaction, safety, and clinical outcomes is needed.

Introduction

Frailty status affects outcomes after heart transplantation, but the optimal way to assess frailty prior to transplant remains unknown.

Methods

This single-center, observational study assessed 44 heart transplant candidates for frailty using three methods. The Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB) and Fried Frailty Phenotype (FFP) were used as two physical assessments of frailty. The Frailty Risk Score (FRS) was used as a chart-review based assessment measuring 20 different biopsychosocial and functional components, including biomarkers, depression, cognitive impairment, and sleep.

Results

We determined the correlation between FRS, SPPB, and FFP and how each correlated with clinical outcomes. Of 44 participants, mean age was 60 years. FRS correlated with SPPB and FFP (P = .043, P < .001, respectively). Higher frailty as measured by SPPB and FRS was significantly associated with lack of achieving waitlist status (P = .022; P = .002) and not being transplanted (P = .026; P = .008). Higher frailty by SPPB and FFP was also associated with mortality (P = .010; P = .025).

Conclusion

SPPB and chart-review FRS showed potential for predicting waitlist and transplant status of heart transplant candidates, while SPPB and FFP were associated with mortality. Additional studies may serve to validate these observations.

We present a patient with a history of lung transplantation who subsequently underwent dual heart-kidney transplantation for nonischemic cardiomyopathy and chronic kidney disease, becoming one of the rare cases of triple-organ transplantation. This case underscores the evolving challenges and successes in managing complex transplant recipients.

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused significant morbidity and mortality in solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients. However, it remains unclear whether the risk factor for SOT patients is the immunosuppression inherent to transplantation versus patient comorbidities.

Methods

We reviewed outcomes in a cohort of SOT (n = 129) and non-SOT (NSOT) patients (n = 708) admitted to the University of California, Los Angeles for COVID-19 infection. Data analyses utilized multivariate logistic regression to evaluate the impact of patient demographics, comorbidities, and transplant status on outcomes. SOT patients were analyzed by kidney SOT (KSOT) versus nonkidney SOT (NKSOT) groups.

Results

SOT and NSOT patients with COVID-19 infection differed in terms of patient age, ethnicity, and comorbidities. NKSOT patients were the most likely to experience death, with a mortality rate of 16.2% compared with 1.8% for KSOT and 8.3% for NSOT patients (p = .013). Multivariable analysis of hospitalized patients revealed that patient age (odds ratio [OR] 2.79, p = .001) and neurologic condition (OR 2.66, p < .001) were significantly associated with mortality. Analysis of ICU patients revealed a 2.98-fold increased odds of death in NKSOT compared with NSOT patients (p = .013).

Conclusions

This study demonstrates the importance of transplant status in predicting adverse clinical outcomes in patients hospitalized or admitted to the ICU with COVID-19, especially for NKSOT patients. Transplant status and comorbidities, including age, could be used to risk stratify patients with COVID-19. This data suggests that immunosuppression contributes to COVID-19 disease severity and mortality and may have implications for managing immunosuppression, especially for critically ill patients admitted to the ICU.

BACKGROUND: Over the last decade, expanding use of molecular diagnostics in heart transplantation has allowed implementation of non-invasive surveillance strategies for monitoring allograft health. The commercially available HeartCare platform combines the AlloMap gene expression profiling assay and the AlloSure donor-derived cell-free DNA test (dd-cfDNA). Beyond their established use for assessment of rejection, evidence is building for predictive utility, with the longitudinal AlloMap Variability score previously shown to correlate with the risk of future rejection, graft dysfunction, re-transplantation, or death. In this single-center, retrospective pilot study, we evaluated the performance of a novel AlloSure Variability metric in predicting mortality in a cohort of heart transplant recipients. METHODS: Seventy-two adult heart transplant recipients with at least 3 concurrent AlloMap/AlloSure results were included. Demographic, clinical, imaging, and laboratory parameters were captured. Variability was defined as the standard deviation of longitudinal AlloMap/AlloSure results. A Cox multivariable adjusted proportional hazards model was used to evaluate the variability metrics as predictors of mortality. Associations between AlloMap/AlloSure variability and donor specific antibody (DSA) status were also assessed. RESULTS: A total of 5 patients (6.9%) died during a median follow-up of 480 days. In a univariate Cox proportional hazards model, higher AlloSure variability (HR 1.66, 95%CI 1.14 - 2.41), but not AlloMap variability or the cross-sectional AlloSure/AlloMap results was associated with increased mortality risk. Longitudinal AlloSure variability was also higher among patients with both preformed DSA and those developing de novo DSA. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that increased variability of dd-cfDNA in heart transplant patients is associated with both mortality risk and the presence of donor specific antibodies. These findings highlight the added value of longitudinal data in the interpretation of AlloMap/AlloSure scores in this population and open the door to larger studies investigating the utility of these metrics in shaping post-transplant clinical care paradigms.

The infectious disease coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization in March 2020. The impact of COVID-19 on solid organ transplantations, including heart transplantation, is currently unclear. Many transplant programs have been forced to swiftly re-evaluate and adapt their practices, leading to a marked decrease in transplants performed. This trend has been due to various factors, including increased donor COVID-19 screening scrutiny and recipient waiting list management in anticipation of COVID-19 critical care surge capacity planning. In the face of these unknown variables, determining when and how to proceed with transplantation in our population of patients with end-stage cardiomyopathies is challenging. Here, we describe our center's experience with orthotopic heart transplantation (OHT) in one of the country's pandemic epicenters, where we performed eight OHTs in the first 2 months after community spread began in late February 2020.