1. HEART TRANSPLANTATION
Pediatric Recipients
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

2. AGE DISTRIBUTION OF PEDIATRIC HEART RECIPIENTS (Transplants: January 1996 - June 2004)
Number of Transplants
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

3. AGE DISTRIBUTION FOR DONORS OF PEDIATRIC HEART RECIPIENTS (Transplants: January 1996 - June 2004)
Number of Transplants
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

4. AGE DISTRIBUTION OF PEDIATRIC HEART RECIPIENTS By Year of Transplant
355
Number of Transplants
This figure includes only the pediatric heart transplants that are reported to the ISHLT Transplant Registry. As such, this should not be construed as evidence that the number of pediatric heart transplants performed worldwide has declined in recent years.
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

5. NUMBER OF CENTERS REPORTING PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANTS
Number of Pediatric Cases Reporting
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

6. DIAGNOSIS IN PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANT RECIPIENTS (Age: < 1 Year)
1/1996-6/2004
% of Cases
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

7. DIAGNOSIS IN PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANT RECIPIENTS (Age: 1-10 Years)
1/1996-6/2004
% of Cases
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

8. DIAGNOSIS IN PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANT RECIPIENTS (Age: 11-17 Years)
1/1996-6/2004
% of Cases
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

9. PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANTATION Kaplan-Meier Survival (1/1982-6/2003)
Survival was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method, which incorporates information from all transplants for whom any follow-up has been provided. Since many patients are still alive and some patients have been lost to follow-up, the survival rates are estimates rather than exact rates because the time of death is not known for all patients. The half-life is the estimated time point at which 50% of all of the recipients have died.
Survival rates were compared using the log-rank test statistic.
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

10. PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANTATION Conditional Kaplan-Meier Survival (1/1982-6/2003)
Survival was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method, which incorporates information from all transplants for whom any follow-up has been provided. Since many patients are still alive and some patients have been lost to follow-up, the survival rates are estimates rather than exact rates because the time of death is not known for all patients. Conditional survival is shown in this figure; this is the survival following 1 year for all patients who survived to 1 year. The conditional half-life is the estimated time point at which 50% of the recipients who survive to at least 1 year have died. Because the decline in survival is greatest during the first year following transplantation, the conditional survival provides a more realistic expectation of survival time for recipients who survive the early post-transplant period.
Survival rates were compared using the log-rank test statistic.
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

11. PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANTATION Conditional 5-year Kaplan-Meier Survival (1/1982-6/2003)
Survival was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method, which incorporates information from all transplants for whom any follow-up has been provided. Since many patients are still alive and some patients have been lost to follow-up, the survival rates are estimates rather than exact rates because the time of death is not known for all patients. Conditional survival is shown in this figure; this is the survival following 5 years for all patients who survived to 5 years. The conditional half-life is the estimated time point at which 50% of the recipients who survive to at least 5 years have died. Because the decline in survival is greatest during the first year following transplantation, the conditional survival provides a more realistic expectation of survival time for recipients who survive the early post-transplant period.
Survival rates were compared using the log-rank test statistic.
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

12. PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANTATION Conditional Kaplan-Meier Survival for Recent Era (1/1999-6/2003)
Survival was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method, which incorporates information from all transplants for whom any follow-up has been provided. Since many patients are still alive and some patients have been lost to follow-up, the survival rates are estimates rather than exact rates because the time of death is not known for all patients. Conditional survival is shown in this figure; this is the survival following 5 years for all patients who survived to 5 years. The conditional half-life is the estimated time point at which 50% of the recipients who survive to at least 5 years have died. Because the decline in survival is greatest during the first year following transplantation, the conditional survival provides a more realistic expectation of survival time for recipients who survive the early post-transplant period.
Survival rates were compared using the log-rank test statistic.
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

13. PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANTATION Kaplan-Meier Survival by Era (1/1982-6/2003)
Survival was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method, which incorporates information from all transplants for whom any follow-up has been provided. Since many patients are still alive and some patients have been lost to follow-up, the survival rates are estimates rather than exact rates because the time of death is not known for all patients. The half-life is the estimated time point at which 50% of all of the recipients have died.
Survival rates were compared using the log-rank test statistic.
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

14. PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANTATION Kaplan-Meier Survival by Era (1/1982-6/2003) Age: < 1 Year
Survival was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method, which incorporates information from all transplants for whom any follow-up has been provided. Since many patients are still alive and some patients have been lost to follow-up, the survival rates are estimates rather than exact rates because the time of death is not known for all patients. The half-life is the estimated time point at which 50% of all of the recipients have died.
Survival rates were compared using the log-rank test statistic.
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

15. PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANTATION Kaplan-Meier Survival by Era (1/1982-6/2003) Age: 1-10 Years
Survival was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method, which incorporates information from all transplants for whom any follow-up has been provided. Since many patients are still alive and some patients have been lost to follow-up, the survival rates are estimates rather than exact rates because the time of death is not known for all patients. The half-life is the estimated time point at which 50% of all of the recipients have died.
Survival rates were compared using the log-rank test statistic.
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

16. PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANTATION Kaplan-Meier Survival by Era (1/1982-6/2003) Age: 11-17 Years
Survival was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method, which incorporates information from all transplants for whom any follow-up has been provided. Since many patients are still alive and some patients have been lost to follow-up, the survival rates are estimates rather than exact rates because the time of death is not known for all patients. The half-life is the estimated time point at which 50% of all of the recipients have died.
Survival rates were compared using the log-rank test statistic.
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

17. PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANTATION Kaplan-Meier Survival Based on Rejection within 1st Year (Transplants: April June 2002)
Survival (%)
p =
Survival was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method, which incorporates information from all transplants for whom any follow-up has been provided. Since many patients are alive and some patients have been lost to follow-up, the survival rates are estimates rather than exact rates because the time of death is not known for all patients and may never occur for some patients. Conditional survival is shown in this figure; this is the survival rate following 1 year for all patients who survived to 1 year. The conditional half-life is the estimated time point at which 50% of the recipients who survive to at least 1 year have died.
Survival rates were compared using the log-rank test statistic.
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

18. PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANTATION Kaplan-Meier Survival Based on Rejection within 1st Year (Transplants: January 1998 – June 2002)
Survival (%)
p =
Survival was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method, which incorporates information from all transplants for whom any follow-up has been provided. Since many patients are alive and some patients have been lost to follow-up, the survival rates are estimates rather than exact rates because the time of death is not known for all patients and may never occur for some patients. Conditional survival is shown in this figure; this is the survival rate following 1 year for all patients who survived to 1 year. The conditional half-life is the estimated time point at which 50% of the recipients who survive to at least 1 year have died.
Survival rates were compared using the log-rank test statistic.
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

19. PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANTS (1/1995-6/2003) Risk Factors For 1 Year Mortality
Multivariable analysis was performed using a proportional hazards model censoring all patients at 1 year.
Continuous factors were fit using a restricted cubic spline.
N=3,014
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

20. PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANTS (1/1995-6/2003) Borderline Significant Risk Factors For 1 Year Mortality
Multivariable analysis was performed using a proportional hazards model censoring all patients at 1 year.
Continuous factors were fit using a restricted cubic spline.
N=3,014
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

21. PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANTS (1/1995-6/2003) Risk Factors for 1 Year Mortality
Multivariable analysis was performed using a proportional hazards model censoring all patients at 1 year.
Continuous factors were fit using a restricted cubic spline.
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

22. PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANTS (1/1995-6/2003) Risk Factors for 1 Year Mortality Donor Age
Multivariable analysis was performed using a proportional hazards model censoring all patients at 1 year.
Continuous factors were fit using a restricted cubic spline.
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

23. PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANTS (1/1995-6/2003) Risk Factors for 1 Year Mortality Pre-Transplant Bilirubin
Multivariable analysis was performed using a proportional hazards model censoring all patients at 1 year.
Continuous factors were fit using a restricted cubic spline.
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

24. PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANTS (1/1995-6/2003) Risk Factors for 1 Year Mortality Pre-Transplant Creatinine
Multivariable analysis was performed using a proportional hazards model censoring all patients at 1 year.
Continuous factors were fit using a restricted cubic spline.
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

25. PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANTS (1/1995-6/2003) Risk Factors for 1 Year Mortality Weight Ratio
Multivariable analysis was performed using a proportional hazards model censoring all patients at 1 year.
Continuous factors were fit using a restricted cubic spline.
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

26. PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANTS (1/1995-6/2003) Factors Not Significant for 1 Year Mortality
Recipient Factors:
IV inotropes, sternotomy, thoracotomy, history of malignancy, height, recent infection, age, PA pressure, cardiac output, pulmonary vascular resistance, PRA
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

27. PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANTS (1/1995-6/2003) Factors Not Significant for 1 Year Mortality
Donor Factors:
Gender, history of hypertension, height, clinical infection, cause of death, history of diabetes
Transplant Factors:
CMV mismatch, ABO identical/compatible, ischemia time, HLA mismatch, transplant center volume
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

28. PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANTS (1/1995-6/2003) 1-Year Predicted Survival – Hypothetical Cases #1 and #2
Predicted survival was computed from the proportional hazards model based on the patient profiles shown.
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

29. PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANTS (1/1995-6/2003) 1-Year Predicted Survival – Hypothetical Case #3
Predicted survival was computed from the proportional hazards model based on the patient profiles shown.
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

30. PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANTS (1/1995-6/2003) 1-Year Predicted Survival – Hypothetical Cases #4 and #5
Predicted survival was computed from the proportional hazards model based on the patient profiles shown.
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

31. PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANTS (1/1995-6/1999) Risk Factors For 5 Year Mortality
Multivariable analysis was performed using a proportional hazards model censoring all patients at 5 years.
Continuous factors were fit using a restricted cubic spline.
N=1,598
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

32. PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANTS (1/1995-6/1999) Risk Factors for 5 Year Mortality
Multivariable analysis was performed using a proportional hazards model censoring all patients at 5 years.
Continuous factors were fit using a restricted cubic spline.
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

33. PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANTS (1/1995-6/1999) Risk Factors for 5 Year Mortality Pre-Transplant Recipient Weight
Multivariable analysis was performed using a proportional hazards model censoring all patients at 5 years.
Continuous factors were fit using a restricted cubic spline.
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

34. PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANTS (1/1995-6/1999) Risk Factors for 5 Year Mortality Pre-Transplant Creatinine
Multivariable analysis was performed using a proportional hazards model censoring all patients at 5 years.
Continuous factors were fit using a restricted cubic spline.
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

35. PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANTS (1/1995-6/1999) Factors Not Significant for 5 Year Mortality
Recipient Factors:
History of malignancy, recent infection, bilirubin, age, hospitalized at time of transplant, PRA, pulmonary vascular resistance, gender, PA pressures, cardiac output, sternotomy, height
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

36. PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANTS (1/1995-6/1999) Factors Not Significant for 5 Year Mortality
Donor Factors:
Cause of death, history of hypertension, weight, height, age
Transplant Factors:
Donor/recipient weight ratio, year of transplant, CMV mismatch, ischemia time, HLA mismatch, transplant center volume
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

37. PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANTS (1/1995-6/1999) 5-Year Predicted Survival – Hypothetical Cases #1,2 and 3
Predicted survival was computed from the proportional hazards model based on the patient profiles shown.
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

38. PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANTS (1/1995-6/1999) 5-Year Predicted Survival – Hypothetical Cases #4 and 5
Predicted survival was computed from the proportional hazards model based on the patient profiles shown.
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

39. PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANTS (1/1995-6/1999) Risk Factors For 5 Year Mortality Conditional on 1 Year Survival
Multivariable analysis was performed using a proportional hazards model conditioning on survival to 1 year and censoring all patients at 5 years.
Continuous factors were fit using a restricted cubic spline.
N=1,276
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

40. PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANTS (1/1995-6/1999) Risk Factors For 5 Year Mortality Conditional on 1 Year Survival
Multivariable analysis was performed using a proportional hazards model conditioning on survival to 1 year and censoring all patients at 5 years.
Continuous factors were fit using a restricted cubic spline.
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

41. PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANTS (1/1995-6/1999) Risk Factors For 5 Year Mortality Conditional on 1 Year Survival Recipient Weight
Multivariable analysis was performed using a proportional hazards model conditioning on survival to 1 year and censoring all patients at 5 years.
Continuous factors were fit using a restricted cubic spline.
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

42. PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANTS (1/1995-6/1999) Risk Factors For 5 Year Mortality Conditional on 1 Year Survival Ischemia Time
Multivariable analysis was performed using a proportional hazards model conditioning on survival to 1 year and censoring all patients at 5 years.
Continuous factors were fit using a restricted cubic spline.
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

43. PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANTS (1/1995-6/1999) Factors Not Significant for Conditional 5 Year Mortality
Recipient Factors:
History of malignancy, recent infection, hospitalized at time of transplant, bilirubin, creatinine, cardiac output, pulmonary vascular resistance, PRA, sternotomy, ventilator, VAD, age, PA pressures
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

44. PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANTS (1/1995-6/1999) Factors Not Significant for Conditional 5 Year Mortality
Donor Factors:
Cause of death, history of hypertension, weight, height, age, gender, clinical infection at donation
Transplant Factors:
Donor/recipient weight ratio, year of transplant, CMV mismatch, transplant center volume, induction use, treated for infection prior to discharge, dialysis prior to discharge
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

45. PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANTS (1/1995-6/1999) 5-Year Predicted Survival Conditional on Survival to 1 Year – Hypothetical Case #1
Predicted survival was computed from the proportional hazards model based on the patient profiles shown.
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

46. PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANTS (1/1995-6/1999) 5-Year Predicted Survival Conditional on Survival to 1 Year – Hypothetical Case #2
Predicted survival was computed from the proportional hazards model based on the patient profiles shown.
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

47. PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANTS (1/1995-6/1999) 5-Year Predicted Survival Conditional on Survival to 1 Year – Hypothetical Case #3
Predicted survival was computed from the proportional hazards model based on the patient profiles shown.
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

48. PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANTS (1/1995-6/1999) 5-Year Predicted Survival Conditional on Survival to 1 Year – Hypothetical Case #4
Predicted survival was computed from the proportional hazards model based on the patient profiles shown.
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

49. PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANTS (1/1995-6/1999) 5-Year Predicted Survival Conditional on Survival to 1 Year – Hypothetical Case #5
Predicted survival was computed from the proportional hazards model based on the patient profiles shown.
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

50. PEDIATRIC HEART RECIPIENTS Functional Status of Surviving Recipients (Follow-ups: April June 2004)
This figure shows the functional status reported on the 1-year, 3-year, 5-year and 7-year annual follow-ups. Because all follow-ups between April 1994 and June 2004 were included, the bars do not include the same patients.
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

51. PEDIATRIC HEART RECIPIENTS Rehospitalization Post-transplant of Surviving Recipients (Follow-ups: April June 2004)
This figure shows the hospitalizations reported on the 1-year, 3-year, 5-year and 7-year annual follow-ups, representing the hospitalizations between discharge and 1 year, between the 2-year and 3-year follow-up, between the 4-year and 5-year follow-up, and between the 6-year and 7-year follow-up, respectively. Because all follow-ups between April 1994 and June 2004 were included, the bars do not include the same patients.
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

52. PEDIATRIC HEART RECIPIENTS Induction Immunosuppression (Follow-ups: January 2001 - June 2004)
% of Patients
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

53. PEDIATRIC HEART RECIPIENTS Induction Immunosuppression (Follow-ups: January 2001 - June 2004)
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

54. PEDIATRIC HEART RECIPIENTS Maintenance Immunosuppression at Time of Follow-up (Follow-ups: January June 2004)
% of Patients
This figure shows the maintenance immunosuppression reported as being provided at the time of the 1-year and 5-year annual follow-up forms. To provide a snapshot of current practice, only follow-ups occurring between January 2001 and June 2004 were included. Therefore, this figure does not represent changes in practice between the 1-year follow-up and 5-year follow-up on a cohort of patients. The patients in the 1-year tabulation are not the same patients as in the 5-year tabulation.
NOTE: Different patients are analyzed in Year 1 and Year 5
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

55. PEDIATRIC HEART RECIPIENTS Maintenance Immunosuppression Drug Combinations at Time of Follow-up (Follow-ups: January June 2004)
% of Patients
This figure shows the maintenance immunosuppression reported as being provided at the time of the 1-year and 5-year annual follow-up forms. To provide a snapshot of current practice, only follow-ups occurring between January 2001 and June 2003 were included. Therefore, this figure does not represent changes in practice between the 1-year follow-up and 5-year follow-up on a cohort of patients. The patients in the 1-year tabulation are not the same patients as in the 5-year tabulation.
NOTE: Different patients are analyzed in Year 1 and Year 5
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

56. PERCENTAGE OF PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANT RECIPIENTS TREATED FOR REJECTION IN 1ST YEAR Stratified by Induction (Transplants: January June 2003)
% treated for rejection within 1year
Comparisons were made using the chi-square statistic. No adjustments were made for multiple comparisons.
No within age group or gender comparisons were significant.
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

57. NUMBER OF REJECTION EPISODES FOR PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANT RECIPIENTS TREATED FOR REJECTION IN 1ST YEAR Stratified by Induction (Transplants: January June 2003)
Average number of rejection episodes
Comparisons were made using the chi-square statistic. No adjustments were made for multiple comparisons.
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

58. PERCENTAGE OF PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANT RECIPIENTS TREATED FOR REJECTION IN 1ST YEAR Stratified by Type of Induction (Transplants: January June 2003)
% treated for rejection within 1year
Comparisons were made using the chi-square statistic. No adjustments were made for multiple comparisons.
Overall: No induction vs. OKT3 (p = ); polyclonal vs. OKT3 (p = ); IL2 vs. OKT3 (p = ).
1-10: No induction vs. polyclonal (p = 0.04);
11-17: No induction vs. OKT3 (p = 0.003); polyclonal vs. OKT3 (p = 0.007); IL2R vs. OKT3 (p = 0.002)
Female: No induction vs. OKT3 (p = 0.003); polyclonal vs. OKT3 (p = 0.01); IL2R vs. OTK3 (p = 0.03)
Male: No induction vs. OKT3 (p=0.03); polyclonal vs. OKT3 (p < 0.05); IL2R vs. OKT3 (p = 0.01)
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

59. NUMBER OF REJECTION EPISODES FOR PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANT RECIPIENTS TREATED FOR REJECTION IN 1ST YEAR Stratified by Type of Induction (Transplants: January June 2003)
Average number of rejection episodes
Comparisons were made using the chi-square statistic. No adjustments were made for multiple comparisons.
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

60. PERCENTAGE OF PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANT RECIPIENTS TREATED FOR REJECTION IN 1ST YEAR Stratified by Maintenance Immunosuppression and Induction (Transplants: January June 2003)
% treated for rejection within 1year
Comparisons were made using the chi-square statistic. No adjustments were made for multiple comparisons.
Overall: CyA + no induction vs. TAC + no induction: p = ; CyA + induction vs. TAC + induction: p = ; CyA + induction vs. TAC + no induction: p = ; CyA + no induction vs. TAC +induction: p = ;
1-10 years: CyA + no induction vs. TAC + no induction: p = ; CyA + induction vs. TAC + induction:
p = ; CyA + induction vs. TAC + no induction: p =
Female: CyA + no induction vs. TAC + no induction: p=0.008; CyA + induction vs. TAC + induction: p = ; CyA + induction vs. TAC + no induction: p = ; CyA + no induction vs. TAC + induction: p =
No other age group or gender differences were significant.
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

61. NUMBER OF REJECTION EPISODES FOR PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANT RECIPIENTS TREATED FOR REJECTION IN 1ST YEAR Stratified by Maintenance Immunosuppression and Induction (Transplants: January June 2003)
Average number of rejection episodes
Comparisons were made using the chi-square statistic. No adjustments were made for multiple comparisons.
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

62. PERCENTAGE OF PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANT RECIPIENTS TREATED FOR REJECTION IN 1ST YEAR Stratified by Maintenance Immunosuppression (Transplants: January June 2003)
% treated for rejection within 1 year
Comparisons were made using the chi-square statistic. No adjustments were made for multiple comparisons.
Overall: CyA+MMF vs. TAC+MMF (p = ); CyA +MMF vs. TAC + AZA (p = ); CyA + AZA vs. TAC + MMF (p = ); CyA + AZA vs. TAC + AZA (p = ).
<1: CyA + MMF vs. TAC + MMF ( p = 0.03); CyA + AZA vs. TAC + MMF (p = 0.005).
1-10: Cya + MMF vs. TAC + AZA (p = 0.005); CyA + AZA vs. TAC + AZA (p = 0.004).
11-17: CyA + AZA vs. TAC + MMF (p = 0.01).
Female: CyA + MMF vs. TAC + AZA (p = 0.002); CyA + AZA vs. TAC + MMF (p = 0.01); CyA + AZA vs. TAC + AZA (p=0.0006); TAC + MMF vs. TAC + AZA (p = 0.03).
Male: CyA + MMF vs. TAC + MMF (p < 0.05)
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

63. NUMBER OF REJECTION EPISODES FOR PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANT RECIPIENTS TREATED FOR REJECTION IN 1ST YEAR Stratified by Maintenance Immunosuppression (Transplants: January June 2003)
Average number of rejection episodes
Comparisons were made using the chi-square statistic. No adjustments were made for multiple comparisons.
<1 years: CyA + AZA vs. TAC + MMF (p=0.004).
No other age group or gender comparisons were significant.
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

64. PERCENTAGE OF PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANT RECIPIENTS TREATED FOR REJECTION IN 1ST YEAR Stratified by Tacrolimus vs. Cyclosporine Use at Discharge Conditional on Survival to 14 Days (Transplants: January June 2003)
% treated for rejection within 1year
Comparisons were made using the chi-square statistic. No adjustments were made for multiple comparisons.
<1: CyA vs. TAC (p = )
1-10: CyA vs. TAC (p = )
Females: CyA vs. TAC (p = )
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

65. NUMBER OF REJECTION EPISODES FOR PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANT RECIPIENTS TREATED FOR REJECTION IN 1ST YEAR Stratified by Tacrolimus vs. Cyclosporine Use at Discharge Conditional on Survival to 14 Days (Transplants: January June 2003)
Average number of rejection episodes
Comparisons were made using the chi-square statistic. No adjustments were made for multiple comparisons.
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

66. POST-HEART TRANSPLANT MORBIDITY FOR PEDIATRICS Cumulative Prevalence in Survivors within 1 Year Post-Transplant (Follow-ups: April June 2004)
This table shows the percentage of patients experiencing various morbidities as reported on the 1-year annual follow-up form. The percentages are based on patients with known responses. Because the outcomes are reported to be unknown at different rates the number with known responses for each outcome are also provided.
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

67. POST-HEART TRANSPLANT MORBIDITY FOR PEDIATRICS Cumulative Prevalence in Survivors within 5 Years Post-Transplant (Follow-ups: April June 2004)
This table shows the percentage of patients experiencing various morbidities as reported within 5 years following transplantation. The percentages are based on patients with known responses. To reduce bias, only patients with responses reported on every follow-up through the 5-year annual follow-up were included. Because the outcomes are reported to be unknown at different rates the number with known responses for each outcome are also provided.
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

68. POST-HEART TRANSPLANT MORBIDITY FOR PEDIATRICS Cumulative Prevalence in Survivors within 7 Years Post-Transplant (Follow-ups: April June 2004)
This table shows the percentage of patients experiencing various morbidities as reported within 7 years following transplantation. The percentages are based on patients with known responses. To reduce bias, only patients with responses reported on every follow-up through the 7-year annual follow-up were included. Because the outcomes are reported to be unknown at different rates the number with known responses for each outcome are also provided.
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

69. FREEDOM FROM CORONARY ARTERY VASCULOPATHY For Pediatric Heart Recipients (Follow-ups: April June 2004)
% Freedom from CAV
Freedom from CAV was computed using the Kaplan-Meier method.
The development of CAV is reported on annual follow-ups; a date of diagnosis is not provided. For this figure the midpoint between the date of previous follow-up (when event had not occurred) and the date of follow-up when the event was reported was used as the date of occurrence. Patients were included in the analysis until an unknown response for the outcome of interest was reported. Therefore, the rates seen here may differ from those reported in the cumulative prevalence slide which is based on only those patients with known responses for each of the outcomes at all follow-up time points.
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

70. FREEDOM FROM CORONARY ARTERY VASCULOPATHY For Pediatric Heart Recipients (Follow-ups: April June 2004) Stratified by Induction
% Freedom from CAV
p = 0.43
Freedom from CAV was computed using the Kaplan-Meier method.
The development of CAV is reported on annual follow-ups; a date of diagnosis is not provided. For this figure the midpoint between the date of previous follow-up (when event had not occurred) and the date of follow-up when the event was reported was used as the date of occurrence. Patients were included in the analysis until an unknown response for the outcome of interest was reported. Therefore, the rates seen here may differ from those reported in the cumulative prevalence slide which is based on only those patients with known responses for each of the outcomes at all follow-up time points.
Freedom from CAV rates were compared using the log-rank test statistic.
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

71. FREEDOM FROM CORONARY ARTERY VASCULOPATHY For Pediatric Heart Recipients (Follow-ups: April June 2004) Stratified by Age Group
% Freedom from CAV
Freedom from CAV was computed using the Kaplan-Meier method.
The development of CAV is reported on annual follow-ups; a date of diagnosis is not provided. For this figure the midpoint between the date of previous follow-up (when event had not occurred) and the date of follow-up when the event was reported was used as the date of occurrence. Patients were included in the analysis until an unknown response for the outcome of interest was reported. Therefore, the rates seen here may differ from those reported in the cumulative prevalence slide which is based on only those patients with known responses for each of the outcomes at all follow-up time points.
Freedom from CAV rates were compared using the log-rank test statistic.
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

72. GRAFT SURVIVAL FOLLOWING REPORT OF CORONARY ARTERY VASCULOPATHY For Pediatric Heart Recipients (Follow-ups: April June 2004) Stratified by Age Group
Survival since Report of CAV (%)
Survival was computed using the Kaplan-Meier method.
The development of CAV is reported on annual follow-ups; a date of diagnosis is not provided. For this figure the midpoint between the date of previous follow-up (when event had not occurred) and the date of follow-up when the event was reported was used as the date of occurrence. Survival was computed from this time point.
Survival rates were compared using the log-rank test statistic.
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

73. FREEDOM FROM SEVERE RENAL DYSFUNCTION
FREEDOM FROM SEVERE RENAL DYSFUNCTION* For Pediatric Heart Recipients (Follow-ups: April June 2004)
% Freedom from Severe
Renal Dysfunction
* Severe renal dysfunction = Creatinine > 2.5 mg/dl, dialysis or renal transplant
Freedom from severe renal dysfunction rate was computed using the Kaplan-Meier method.
The development of severe renal dysfunction is reported on annual follow-ups; a date of diagnosis is not provided. For this figure the midpoint between the date of previous follow-up (when event had not occurred) and the date of follow-up when the event was reported was used as the date of occurrence. Patients were included in the analysis until an unknown response for the outcome of interest was reported. Therefore, the rates seen here may differ from those reported in the cumulative prevalence slide which is based on only those patients with known responses for each of the outcomes at all follow-up time points.
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

74. MALIGNANCY POST-HEART TRANSPLANTATION FOR PEDIATRICS Cumulative Prevalence in Survivors (Follow-ups: April June 2004)
Malignancy/Type
1-Year Survivors
5-Year Survivors
7-Year Survivors
No Malignancy
2230 (98.0%)
716 (95.9%)
365 (93.8%)
Malignancy (all types combined)
45 (2.0%)
31 (4.1%)
24 (6.2%)
Malignancy Type
Lymph 41 27 22
Other 3
Type Not Reported 1
This table shows the percentage of patients with malignancies reported within 1, 5, and 7 years following transplantation. The percentages are based on patients with known responses. To reduce bias, only patients with responses reported on every follow-up through the 5-year annual follow-up were included in the “5-Year Survivors” column. Similarly, only patients with responses reported on every follow-up through the 7-year annual follow-up were included in the “7-Year Survivors” column.
Other types: Ewings, Large cell lymphoma
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

75. FREEDOM FROM MALIGNANCY For Pediatric Heart Recipients (Follow-ups: April 1994 - June 2004)
Freedom from malignancy rates were computed using the Kaplan-Meier method.
The development of malignancy is reported on annual follow-ups; a date of diagnosis is not provided. For this figure the midpoint between the date of previous follow-up (when malignancy had not been reported) and the date of follow-up when the malignancy was reported was used as the date of occurrence. Patients were included in the analysis until an unknown response for malignancy was reported. Therefore, the rates seen here may differ from those reported in the cumulative prevalence slide which is based on only those patients with known responses for malignancy at all follow-up time points.
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

76. PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANTATION Kaplan-Meier Survival Based on Prednisone Use (Transplants: April June 2003)
Survival (%)
p =
Survival was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method, which incorporates information from all transplants for whom any follow-up has been provided. Since many patients are still alive and some patients have been lost to follow-up, the survival rates are estimates rather than exact rates because the time of death is not known for all patients. The conditioned on survival to 1 year, so that prednisone use during the first year could be used as a stratification factor.
Survival rates were compared using the log-rank test statistic.
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

77. PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANTATION Kaplan-Meier Survival Based on Prednisone Use (Transplants: January 1998 – June 2003)
Survival (%)
p = 0.009
Survival was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method, which incorporates information from all transplants for whom any follow-up has been provided. Since many patients are still alive and some patients have been lost to follow-up, the survival rates are estimates rather than exact rates because the time of death is not known for all patients. The conditioned on survival to 1 year, so that prednisone use during the first year could be used as a stratification factor.
Survival rates were compared using the log-rank test statistic.
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

78. PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANTATION Kaplan-Meier Survival by Induction Group (Transplants: January 2000 – June 2003) Conditional on Survival to 14 Days
No comparisons were statistically significant.
Survival (%)
Survival was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method, which incorporates information from all transplants for whom any follow-up has been provided. Since many patients are still alive and some patients have been lost to follow-up, the survival rates are estimates rather than exact rates because the time of death is not known for all patients.
Survival rates were compared using the log-rank test statistic.
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

79. PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANTATION Kaplan-Meier Survival by Induction Group (Transplants: January 2000 – June 2003) Conditional on Survival to 14 Days Age: < 1 Year
Survival (%)
Survival was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method, which incorporates information from all transplants for whom any follow-up has been provided. Since many patients are still alive and some patients have been lost to follow-up, the survival rates are estimates rather than exact rates because the time of death is not known for all patients.
Survival rates were compared using the log-rank test statistic.
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

80. PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANTATION Kaplan-Meier Survival by Induction Group (Transplants: January 2000 – June 2003) Conditional on Survival to 14 Days Age: 1-10 Years
Survival (%)
Survival was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method, which incorporates information from all transplants for whom any follow-up has been provided. Since many patients are still alive and some patients have been lost to follow-up, the survival rates are estimates rather than exact rates because the time of death is not known for all patients.
Survival rates were compared using the log-rank test statistic.
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

81. PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANTATION Kaplan-Meier Survival by Induction Group (Transplants: January 2000 – June 2003) Conditional on Survival to 14 Days Age: Years
Survival (%)
Survival was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method, which incorporates information from all transplants for whom any follow-up has been provided. Since many patients are still alive and some patients have been lost to follow-up, the survival rates are estimates rather than exact rates because the time of death is not known for all patients.
Survival rates were compared using the log-rank test statistic.
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

82. PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANTATION Kaplan-Meier Survival Stratified by Tacrolimus vs. Cyclosporine Use at Discharge (Transplants: January June 2003) Conditional on Survival to 14 Days
Survival (%)
Survival was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method, which incorporates information from all transplants for whom any follow-up has been provided. Since many patients are still alive and some patients have been lost to follow-up, the survival rates are estimates rather than exact rates because the time of death is not known for all patients.
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

83. % HTN reported between 1 and 3 years For Patients not on drug
PEDIATRIC HEART RECIPIENTS Incidence of Hypertension between 1 and 3 Years (Transplants: April June 2001)
Maintenance Immunosuppression at discharge and 1 year
% HTN reported between 1 and 3 years
P-value
For Patients on drug
For Patients not on drug
Azathioprine
21.6%
22.1%
0.9
Cyclosporine
20.5%
21.4%
0.8
MMF
19.9%
21.0%
Prednisone
28.9%
6.6%
<0.0001
Rapamycin .
20.6%
Tacrolimus
24.8%
19.5%
0.2
Percentages were compared using the chi-squared test statistic.
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

84. PEDIATRIC HEART RECIPIENTS Relationship of Rejection and Coronary Artery Vasculopathy (Follow-ups: April 1994 – June 2004)
Rejection During 1st Year
Reported CAV between 1st and 3rd years
post-transplant
Reported CAV between 3rd and 5th years
Yes No
All 36
8.1%
408
91.9%
444
100% 12
6.5%
174
93.5%
186 13
3.0%
420
97.0%
433 9
4.6%
188
95.4%
197
Percentages were compared using the chi-squared test statistic.
p = p =
NOTE: Only those recipients without CAV prior to 3 years were included in the last set of columns
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

85. PEDIATRIC HEART RECIPIENTS Growth Following Transplantation: Height Stratified by Prednisone Use at Discharge and at 1 Year
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

86. PEDIATRIC HEART RECIPIENTS Growth Following Transplantation: Weight Stratified by Prednisone Use at Discharge and at 1 Year
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:

87. PEDIATRIC HEART TRANSPLANT RECIPIENTS: Cause of Death (Deaths: January 1992 - June 2004)
0-30 Days (N = 335)
31 Days - 1 Year (N = 281)
>1 Year - 3 Years (N = 198)
>3 Years - 5 Years (N = 139)
>5 Years (N = 252)
CORONARY ARTERY VASCULOPATHY
3 (0.9%)
26 (9.3%)
36 (18.2%)
52 (37.4%)
72 (28.6%)
ACUTE REJECTION
27 (8.1%)
76 (27.0%)
54 (27.3%)
18 (12.9%)
32 (12.7%)
LYMPHOMA
6 (2.1%)
10 (5.1%)
3 (2.2%)
21 (8.3%)
MALIGNANCY, OTHER
4 (1.4%)
2 (1.0%)
1 (0.7%)
9 (3.6%)
CMV
1 (0.3%)
7 (2.5%)
1 (0.5%)
INFECTION, NON-CMV
47 (14.0%)
46 (16.4%)
17 (8.6%)
6 (4.3%)
16 (6.3%)
PRIMARY FAILURE
58 (17.3%)
11 (3.9%)
6 (3.0%)
8 (5.8%)
12 (4.8%)
GRAFT FAILURE
79 (23.6%)
31 (11.0%)
35 (17.7%)
27 (19.4%)
49 (19.4%)
TECHNICAL
21 (6.3%)
2 (0.7%)
1 (0.4%)
OTHER
15 (4.5%)
16 (5.7%)
16 (8.1%)
14 (10.1%)
24 (9.5%)
MULTIPLE ORGAN FAILURE
36 (10.7%)
29 (10.3%)
3 (1.5%)
2 (1.4%)
6 (2.4%)
RENAL FAILURE
PULMONARY
24 (7.2%)
9 (4.5%)
7 (2.8%)
CEREBROVASCULAR
23 (6.9%)
3 (1.2%)
ISHLT
2005
J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24: