Dr. Katherine  Lietz  Md Phd image

Dr. Katherine Lietz Md Phd

2160 S First Ave Loyola University Medical Center
Maywood IL 60153
708 272-2738
Medical School: Other - Unknown
Accepts Medicare: No
Participates In eRX: No
Participates In PQRS: No
Participates In EHR: No
License #: 127613
NPI: 1194864157
Taxonomy Codes:

Request Appointment Information

Awards & Recognitions

About Us

Practice Philosophy


Medical Malpractice Cases

None Found

Medical Board Sanctions

None Found


None Found


Risk assessment for continuous flow left ventricular assist devices: does the destination therapy risk score work? An analysis of over 1,000 patients. - Journal of the American College of Cardiology
This study sought to assess the utility of the Destination Therapy Risk Score (DTRS) in patients with continuous flow left ventricular assist devices (LVAD).The DTRS was developed to predict the risk of 90-day in-hospital mortality with pulsatile flow LVAD as destination therapy (DT). Despite ongoing use in patients with continuous flow devices, its utility has not been studied in such populations.The DTRS was determined in 1,124 patients with the continuous flow HeartMate II (Thoratec Corporation, Pleasanton, California) LVAD as a bridge to transplant (BTT, n = 486) and DT (n = 638) and 114 DT patients with the pulsatile flow HeartMate XVE (Thoratec Corporation). Patients were divided into risk groups based on DTRS: low (0-8), medium (9-16), and high (>16).The 90-day in-hospital mortality for low-, medium-, and high-risk groups was 8%, 7%, and 16%, respectively, for BTT patients; 9%, 12%, and 19%, respectively, for DT patients; and 11%, 18%, and 25%, respectively, for XVE DT patients. The high-risk groups had more than a 2-fold increased risk of mortality compared with the low-risk groups. However, the area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve for 90-day in-hospital mortality yielded modest values ranging from 0.54 to 0.58 for the HeartMate II BTT and DT groups, respectively. Survival rates over 2 years were statistically significantly different as stratified by the 3 DTRS groups for patients implanted for DT but not for BTT.DTRS provides poor discrimination of mortality for BTT patients and only modest discrimination for DT patients receiving continuous flow LVAD.Copyright © 2012 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Destination therapy: patient selection and current outcomes. - Journal of cardiac surgery
Long-term left-ventricular assist device (LVAD) support as destination therapy (DT) is a promising new alternative for the growing population of patients with advanced heart failure. In this article, we summarize the clinical trials that led to the approval of LVAD use as DT in the US national policies regulating candidate selection and DT center accreditation. We review current guidelines for candidate selection, clinical tools to assess candidate operative risk, and outcomes of DT.
Impact of center volume on outcomes of left ventricular assist device implantation as destination therapy: analysis of the Thoratec HeartMate Registry, 1998 to 2005. - Circulation. Heart failure
More than 400 patients with end-stage heart failure underwent left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation of LVAD as destination therapy (DT) after the US Food and Drug Administration approval of DT in 2002. Because most of these patients had surgeries at hospitals that were newly accredited, we sought to examine the impact of LVAD center volume on the outcomes of DT.From July 1998 through December 2005, a total of 377 patients underwent implantation of HeartMate I LVAD as DT at 68 centers in the United States. Using data from the Thoratec DT Registry, we examined the association between LVAD center volume at the time of surgery and 1-year survival with DT. Of the studied 377 DT recipients, 53% underwent device implantation at centers that performed 9th DT implant; P=0.009). However, the DT center volume was not an independent predictor of 1-year survival with DT when adjusted for the preoperative DT Risk Score, suggesting that other factors, such as improved candidate selection, may have accounted for the institutional learning curve.The institutional experience with DT may have a significant impact on outcomes of this therapy. Better selection of candidates, systemic approach to surgical and postoperative care, as well as the long-term medical management most likely all contribute to these improvements.
Heart transplantation in human immunodeficiency virus-positive patients. - The Journal of heart and lung transplantation : the official publication of the International Society for Heart Transplantation
Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection is widely considered a contraindication for cardiac transplantation. However, with the newer anti-retroviral drugs, the estimated 10-year survival after seroconversion is exceeds 90%. This case series describes the intermediate range outcome of HIV-positive cardiac transplant recipients.A retrospective analysis of 1679 cardiac transplant patients was undertaken to identify HIV-positive recipients.Seven patients were identified. Five (4 men) were diagnosed with HIV before transplantation and 2 patients seroconverted after transplantation. Dilated cardiomyopathy was the indication for transplant in all patients. The 5 HIV recipients were aged 42 +/- 8 years, and time after HIV seroconversion averaged 9.5 years. All underwent cardiac transplantation as high-risk candidates. The CD4 count was 554 +/- 169 cells/microl, and viral load was undetectable in all patients at the time of transplantation. Two patients seroconverted to HIV-positive status at 1 and 7 years after transplant. No AIDS-defining illness was observed in any patient before or after transplant. Six patients received highly active anti-retroviral therapy. Viral load remained low in the presence of immunosuppression. All patients are alive with a follow-up from transplant of 57 +/- 78.9 months.Excellent intermediate term outcome is noted in carefully selected HIV-positive patients. No significant AIDS-related infections or complications occurred.
The role of cerebral hyperperfusion in postoperative neurologic dysfunction after left ventricular assist device implantation for end-stage heart failure. - The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery
Cerebral hyperperfusion is a life-threatening syndrome that can occur in patients with chronically hypoperfused cerebral vasculature whose normal cerebral circulation was re-established after carotid endarterectomy or angioplasty. We sought to determine whether the abrupt restoration of perfusion to the brain after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation produced similar syndromes.We studied the role of increased systemic flow after LVAD implantation on neurologic dysfunction in 69 consecutive HeartMate XVE LVAD (Thoratec, Pleasanton, Calif) recipients from October 2001 through June 2006. Neurologic dysfunction was defined as postoperative permanent or transient central change in neurologic status, including confusion, focal neurologic deficits, visual changes, seizures, or coma for more than 24 hours within 30 days after LVAD implantation.We found that 19 (27.5%) patients had neurologic dysfunction, including encephalopathy (n = 11), coma (n = 3), and other complications (n = 5). The multivariate analysis showed that an increase in cardiac index from the preoperative baseline value (relative risk, 1.33 per 25% cardiac index increase; P = .01) and a previous coronary bypass operation (relative risk, 4.53; P = .02) were the only independent predictors of neurologic dysfunction. Reduction of left ventricular assist device flow in 16 of the 19 symptomatic patients led to improvement of symptoms in 14 (87%) patients.Our findings showed that normal flow might overwhelm cerebral autoregulation in patients with severe heart failure, suggesting that cerebral hyperperfusion is possible in recipients of mechanical circulatory support with neurologic dysfunction.
Patient selection for left-ventricular assist devices. - Current opinion in cardiology
Selection of appropriate candidates is one of the most important determinants of successful outcomes of left-ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation. The review describes a step-by-step approach to evaluation of patients with end-stage heart failure for LVAD implantation.This article includes a summary of the recently published guidelines on candidate selection for long-term mechanical circulatory support, current understanding of the optimal timing of device placement in the disease course and the utility of preoperative screening scales to estimate the patient's operative risk.As technology continues to improve and new devices provide greater safety and durability, continued efforts are needed to better define the clinical determinants of successful LVAD outcomes.
Destination therapy: current results and future promise. - Seminars in thoracic and cardiovascular surgery
The landmark Randomized Evaluation of Mechanical Assistance in the Treatment of Congestive Heart Failure (REMATCH) trial demonstrated that the implantation of left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) as an alternative to heart transplantation, or destination therapy (DT) is superior to any known medical therapy in patients with end-stage heart failure who are not eligible for transplantation. In this article, we review results of the first United States and European clinical trials of DT, including the REMATCH, the Investigation of the Non-Transplant Eligible Patients who are Inotrope Dependent (INTREPID), and the Clinical Utility Baseline Study (CUBS) trials, as well as the outcomes of the first DT implantations in the post-REMATCH era in the United States. The article summarizes the current state of knowledge and future directions in the field of permanent mechanical circulatory support therapy as an alternative to heart transplantation.
Improved survival of patients with end-stage heart failure listed for heart transplantation: analysis of organ procurement and transplantation network/U.S. United Network of Organ Sharing data, 1990 to 2005. - Journal of the American College of Cardiology
We sought to investigate the actual survival of patients with end-stage heart failure listed for heart transplantation (HT) in the U.S.The United Network of Organ Sharing (UNOS) reported that the mortality rates on the U.S. HT waiting list have been gradually declining. This suggests that the survival of these patients may have improved.The survival censored on the day of HT or removal from the waiting list was calculated for 18,004 UNOS status 1 and 30,978 status 2 candidates listed in eras I (1990 to 1994), II (1995 to 1999), and III (2000 to 2005) in the U.S. The Cox proportional model was employed for multivariable analysis.The 1-year survival on the HT waiting list improved from 49.5% to 69.0% for status 1 and from 81.8% to 89.4% for status 2 candidates between eras I and III. The predictors of death within 2 months from listing of status 1 candidates included UNOS status 1A, mechanical ventilation, inotropic and intra-aortic balloon pump support, pulmonary capillary wedge pressure >20 mm Hg and serum creatinine >1.5 mg/dl, failed HT, valvular cardiomyopathy, age >60 years, Caucasian ethnicity, and weight < or =70 kg, as well as the lack of intracardiac cardioverter-defibrillator on the day of listing.Survival of HT candidates on the waiting list has significantly improved. Survival of status 1 candidates continues to depend on urgent HT. Predictors of 2-month mortality may help identify status 1 candidates who warrant the highest priority for HT and/or mechanical circulatory support. The 1-year survival of status 2 candidates approaches outcomes of HT, thus raising the question of whether early listing of some of these patients is justified.
Experience with the Levitronix CentriMag circulatory support system as a bridge to decision in patients with refractory acute cardiogenic shock and multisystem organ failure. - The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery
Patients with refractory acute cardiogenic shock and multisystem organ failure have a poor outcome with implantation of permanent ventricular assist devices. We review our experience with the use of the CentriMag (Levitronix LLC, Waltham, Mass) circulatory support system in such patients whose neurologic status was uncertain.From January 2004 to June 2006, 30 patients underwent CentriMag circulatory support system placement at the University of Minnesota. Of these patients, 12 were transferred from an outside hospital with refractory acute cardiogenic shock requiring biventricular support; they are the focus of this study.Of our 12 study patients, 8 underwent successful bridging to the HeartMate XVE (Thoratec Corp, Pleasanton, Calif) ventricular assist device after biventricular support (mean support time of 9.4 days, range: 5-22 days). Another 2 patients underwent successful explantation (after 8 and 9 days); the remaining 2 patients died (after 4 days). Thus, the survival on CentriMag support, to either bridge or recovery, was 83% (10/12). Of the 8 patients who subsequently underwent HeartMate implantation, 5 also underwent a heart transplant within 6.9 months (range, 4.5-10 months), another 2 are still awaiting a transplant, and 1 died of sepsis and right ventricular failure 3 days after HeartMate implantation. Thus, for our 12 study patients, long-term survival was 75% at 1 month and 62.5% at 1 year.Our aggressive strategy in this group of patients involved early operative intervention and implantation of biventricular support. By using this strategy, we avoided the urgent placement of expensive long-term ventricular assist devices in hemodynamically unstable patients with multisystem organ failure whose neurologic status was uncertain until end-organ recovery and excellent hemodynamic stability were achieved with the relatively inexpensive short-term CentriMag circulatory support system. The excellent midterm outcomes in this group of patients whose original prognosis was poor justify this therapeutic strategy.
Outcomes of left ventricular assist device implantation as destination therapy in the post-REMATCH era: implications for patient selection. - Circulation
The landmark Randomized Evaluation of Mechanical Assistance for the Treatment of Congestive Heart Failure (REMATCH) trial first demonstrated that implantation of left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) as destination therapy (DT) can provide survival superior to any known medical treatment in patients with end-stage heart failure who are ineligible for transplantation. In the present study, we describe outcomes of DT in the post-REMATCH era in the United States.The present study included 280 patients who underwent HeartMate XVE LVAD implantation between November 2001 and December 2005. A preoperative risk score for in-hospital mortality after LVAD implantation was established in 222 patients with complete data. All patients were followed up until death or December 2006. The 1-year survival after LVAD implantation was 56%. The in-hospital mortality after LVAD surgery was 27%. The main causes of death included sepsis, right heart failure, and multiorgan failure. The most important determinants of in-hospital mortality were poor nutrition, hematological abnormalities, markers of end-organ or right ventricular dysfunction, and lack of inotropic support. Stratification of DT candidates into low (n=65), medium (n=111), high (n=28), and very high (n=18) risk on the basis of the risk score calculated from these predictors corresponded with 1-year survival rates of 81%, 62%, 28%, and 11%, respectively.Appropriate selection of candidates and timing of LVAD implantation are critical for improved outcomes of DT. Patients with advanced heart failure who are referred for DT before major complications of heart failure develop have the best chance of achieving an excellent 1-year survival with LVAD therapy.

Map & Directions

2160 S First Ave Loyola University Medical Center Maywood, IL 60153
View Directions In Google Maps

Nearby Doctors

2160 S 1St Ave
Maywood, IL 60153
708 168-8785
2160 S 1St Ave
Maywood, IL 60153
708 273-3436
2160 S 1St Ave
Maywood, IL 60153
708 164-4403
2160 S 1St Ave
Maywood, IL 60153
708 169-9000
2160 S 1St Ave
Maywood, IL 60153
708 272-2574
2160 S 1St Ave
Maywood, IL 60153
708 169-9000
2160 S 1St Ave Pathology Department
Maywood, IL 60153
708 272-2626
2160 S 1St Ave Room 7609
Maywood, IL 60153
708 168-8757
2160 S 1St Ave
Maywood, IL 60153
708 164-4254