Mid-term results of heart transplantation, cardiomyoplasty, and medical treatment of refractory heart failure caused by idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy.

BACKGROUND

Heart transplantation is the surgical procedure of choice for treatment of refractory heart failure. However, it benefits a small number of patients because of the limited number of donors and selection criteria of recipients. Cardiomyoplasty is an alternative surgical procedure for heart failure. The aim of this investigation was to report our experience with heart transplantation, cardiomyoplasty, and clinical treatment of heart failure caused by idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy.

METHODS

Ninety patients with refractory heart failure caused by idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy were observed from May 1988 to March 1993. The patients had New York Heart Association functional class III or IV symptoms. The patients were divided in three groups according to the treatment received: heart transplantation (33 patients), cardiomyoplasty (25 patients), or medical treatment (32 patients). We studied the event-free curve, the New York Heart Association functional class, the left ventricular ejection fraction, and the morbidity of the groups in the follow-up of 19 +/- 16 months. We considered as an event death or crossover to another group because of severe symptoms.

RESULTS

The event-free rate in the cardiomyoplasty group was 92%, 88%, 79%, 74%, and 62% at 3, 9, 12, 18, and 24 months of follow-up, respectively. The event-free rate after heart transplantation was 82%, 78%, 82%, 75%, and 69% at 3, 9, 12, 18, and 24 months, respectively. The event-free rate in the medical treatment group was 78%, 65%, 61%, 48%, and 48% at 3, 9, 12, 18, and 24 months, respectively. All surviving patients in the heart transplantation group had functional class I symptoms. After cardiomyoplasty 90% of surviving patients had class I or II symptoms and 10% had class III symptoms. However, in the medical treatment group 27% of surviving patients had class I or II symptoms and 67% had class III or IV symptoms. In the cardiomyoplasty group left ventricular ejection fraction increased from 20% +/- 3% to 24.4% +/- 6.3% at 6 months (p < 0.05). In the heart transplantation group the left ventricular ejection fraction normalized, and the mean value of the left ventricular ejection fraction did not change in the medical treatment group. The need for endomyocardial biopsy and the incidence of rejection and infection were characteristics of the heart transplantation group.

CONCLUSIONS

In properly selected patients, cardiomyoplasty and heart transplantation seem to be associated with improvement in survival and functional class at mid-term follow-up. Heart transplantation was more effective than cardiomyoplasty for functional class improvement.