Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Perioperative mechanical circulatory support in children: an analysis of the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Congenital Heart Surgery Database.

OBJECTIVES: Analyses of mechanical circulatory support (MCS) in pediatric heart surgery have primarily focused on single-center outcomes or narrow applications. We describe the patterns of use, patient characteristics, and MCS-associated outcomes across a large multicenter cohort.

METHODS: Patients (aged <18 years) in the Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) Congenital Heart Surgery Database (2000-2010) were included. The characteristics and outcomes of those receiving postoperative MCS were described, and bayesian hierarchical models were used to examine variations in the adjusted MCS rates across institutions.

RESULTS: Of 96,596 operations (80 centers), MCS was used in 2.4%. The MCS patients were younger (13 vs 195 days, P < .0001) and more often had STS-defined preoperative risk factors (57.2% vs 32.7%, P < .0001). The operations with the greatest MCS rates included the Norwood procedure (17%) and complex biventricular repairs (arterial switch, ventricular septal defect, and arch repair [14%]). More than one half of the MCS patients did not survive to hospital discharge (53.2% vs 2.9% of non-MCS patients; P < .0001). MCS-associated mortality was greatest for truncus arteriosus and Ross-Konno operations (both 71%). The hospital-level MCS rates adjusted for patient characteristics and case mix varied by 15-fold across institutions, with both high- and low-volume hospitals having substantial variation in MCS rates.

CONCLUSIONS: Perioperative MCS use varied widely across centers. The MCS rates were greatest overall for the Norwood procedure and complex biventricular repairs. Although MCS can be a life-saving therapy, more than one half of MCS patients will not survive to hospital discharge, with mortality >70% for some operations. Future studies aimed at better understanding the appropriate indications, optimal timing, and management of MCS could help to reduce the variation in MCS use across hospitals and improve outcomes.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app