Dataset Information

Procedure Preference and Intention-to-Treat Outcomes after Listing for Lung Transplantation among U.S. Adults. A Cohort Study.

ABSTRACT:

Rationale

Bilateral lung transplantation is widely used to treat chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and interstitial lung disease (ILD), on the basis of an expectation of improved survival after transplantation. Yet, waiting list mortality is higher while awaiting bilateral transplantation. The net effect of procedure preference on overall survival is unknown.

Objectives

To determine whether an unrestricted procedure preference is associated with improved overall outcomes after listing for lung transplantation.

Methods

We performed a retrospective cohort study of 12,155 adults with COPD or ILD listed for lung transplantation in the United States between May 4, 2005, and December 31, 2014. We defined a "restricted" procedure preference as listing for "bilateral transplantation only" and an "unrestricted" procedure preference as listing for any combination of bilateral or single lung transplantation. We used a composite "intention-to-treat" primary outcome that included events both before and after transplantation, defined as the number of days between listing and death, removal from the list for clinical deterioration, or retransplantation.

Results

In adjusted analyses, an unrestricted procedure preference was associated with a 3% lower rate of the primary intention-to-treat outcome in COPD (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.97; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.89-1.07) and a 1% higher rate in ILD (aHR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.94-1.08). There was no convincing evidence that these associations varied by age, disease severity, or the use of mechanical support. Among those with ILD and concomitant severe pulmonary hypertension, an unrestricted preference was associated with a 17% increased rate of the primary outcome (aHR, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.99-1.39). An unrestricted preference was consistently associated with lower rates of death or removal from the list for clinical deterioration and with higher rates of transplantation. Graft failure rates were similar among those listed with restricted and unrestricted preferences.

Conclusion

When considering outcomes both before and after transplantation, we found no evidence that patients with COPD or ILD benefit from listing for bilateral lung transplantation compared with listing for a more liberal procedure preference. An unrestricted listing strategy for suitable candidates may increase the number of transplants performed without impacting overall survival.

SUBMITTER: Anderson MR

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6376945 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background and objectivesCognitive impairment is common in patients with kidney disease and can affect physicians' perception and/or patients' ability to complete the pretransplant evaluation. We examined whether cognitive impairment influences the likelihood for transplant listing and whether patients with cognitive impairment take longer to be listed.Design, setting, participants, & measurementsWe conducted a single-center longitudinal cohort study. Patients presenting for their index kidney transplant evaluation were screened for cognitive impairment using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment. A score <26 indicated cognitive impairment. The transplant selection committee was blinded to the scores. Kaplan-Meier analysis assessed time to active listing by level of cognition. A Cox proportional hazards model that included age, sex, race/ethnicity, smoking, coronary artery disease, and diabetes was constructed to evaluate the association between Montreal Cognitive Assessment score and listing for transplant.ResultsIn total, 349 patients who underwent Montreal Cognitive Assessment testing at their initial visit were included in the analysis. Patients with cognitive impairment were more likely to be older, black, and smokers. The time to listing in patients with cognitive impairment was longer than the time to listing in those with no cognitive impairment (median time, 10.6 versus 6.3 months; log rank test P=0.01). Cognitive impairment was independently associated with a lower likelihood of being listed for transplant (hazard ratio, 0.93 per unit lower Montreal Cognitive Assessment score; 95% confidence interval, 0.88 to 0.99; P=0.02). A lower proportion of patients with cognitive impairment were listed compared with patients without cognitive impairment at 1 month (2% versus 11%), 6 months (17% versus 37%), and 1 year (23% versus 41%), (P<0.001 for all).ConclusionsCognitive impairment is associated with a lower likelihood of being listed for kidney transplant, and is associated with longer time to transplant listing.

Project description:Food reward sensitivity may influence susceptibility to overeating in a permissive food environment, contributing to unintended weight gain and intentional weight loss behavior. This study examined associations of food reward sensitivity, assessed by the Power of Food Scale (PFS), with weight outcomes and dieting in a nationally representative cohort of U.S. emerging adults. Wave 5 (W5, 5th year of follow-up) respondents from the NEXT Generation Health Study were included (N = 2202, W5 age = 20.3 ± 0.02 years). Baseline and W5 BMI, W5 weight status (normal weight = 18.5 ? BMI < 25, overweight = 25 ? BMI < 30, obese = BMI ? 30), BMI change (W5-baseline BMI) and onset of overweight or obesity (OWOB) were calculated from self-reported height and weight. PFS (aggregate and 3 domain scores: food available, present, and tasted) and dieting for weight-loss were assessed at W5. Adjusted linear regressions estimated associations of PFS with W5 BMI and BMI change. Log-binomial regressions estimated associations of high W5 BMI (?25), OWOB onset and dieting with PFS. Post hoc analyses estimated associations of PFS with W5 perceived weight status (overweight vs. about right or underweight). W5 BMI = 25.73 ± 0.32 kg/m(2), and OWOB onset occurred in 27.7% of participants. The PFS-food available score was associated with BMI change, ? ± SE = 0.41 ± 0.19. Other PFS scores were not associated with weight outcomes. Dieting prevalence was higher in participants with high versus low W5 BMI (61% versus 32%), and was positively associated with all PFS scores except the PFS-food tasted score, e.g., relative risk (RR) of dieting for PFS-aggregate = 1.13, 95%CI [1.01-1.26]. Post-hoc analyses indicated perceived overweight was positively associated with PFS-food available, 1.12, [1.01-1.24], and PFS-food present, 1.13, [1.03-1.24]. PFS was positively related to dieting and perceived overweight, but not concurrent or change in weight status in a representative cohort of U.S. emerging adults.