Dataset Information

Dual Procurement of Lung and Heart Allografts Does Not Negatively Affect Lung Transplant Outcomes.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The data that exists regarding multiorgan procurement outcomes is conflicted. Given the increasing demand for pulmonary allografts, it is critical to assess the impact of dual procurement on lung transplant recipient outcomes.

Methods

The United Network for Organ Sharing transplant registry was queried for all first-time adult (age ≥18) lung transplant recipients between 2006 and 2018 and stratified by concurrent heart donor status. Multiorgan transplant recipients and recipients with missing survival time were excluded. Donors were excluded if they were donating after circulatory death, did not consent or were not approached for heart donation, the heart was recovered for nontransplant purposes, or the heart was recovered for transplant but not transplanted. Post-transplant survival was analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method and multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression.

Results

A total of 18,641 recipients met inclusion criteria, including 6230 (33.4%) in the nonheart donor group (NHD) and 12,409 (66.6%) in the heart donor group (HD). HD recipients demonstrated longer survival at 10 years posttransplant, with a median survival of 6.5 years as compared with 5.9 years in NHD recipients. On adjusted analysis, HD and NHD recipients demonstrated comparable survival (AHR 0.95, 95% CI 0.90-1.01).

Conclusions

Concomitant heart and lung procurement was not associated with worse survival. This finding encourages maximizing the number of organs procured from each donor, particularly in the setting of urgency-driven thoracic transplantation.

SUBMITTER: Contreras FJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8378263 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundControlled donation after circulatory death (cDCD) has become a standard in liver, kidney, and lung transplantation (LTx). Based on recent innovations in ex vivo heart preservation, heart transplant centers have started to accept cDCD heart allografts. Because the heart has very limited tolerance to warm ischemia, changes to the cDCD organ procurement procedures are needed. These changes entail delayed ventilation and prolonged warm ischemia for the lungs. Whether this negatively impacts lung allograft function is unclear.MethodsA retrospective analysis of cDCD lungs transplanted between 2012 and February 2022 at the Medical University of Vienna was performed. The heart + lung group consisted of cases in which the heart was procured by a cardiac team for subsequent normothermic ex vivo perfusion. A control group (lung group) was formed by cases where only the lungs were explanted. In heart + lung group cases, the heart procurement team placed cannulas after circulatory death and a hands-off time, collected donor blood for ex vivo perfusion, and performed rapid organ perfusion with Custodiol solution, after which the heart was explanted. Up to this point, the lung procurement team did not interfere. No concurrent lung ventilation or pulmonary artery perfusion was performed. After the cardiac procurement team left the table, ventilation was initiated, and lung perfusion was performed directly through both stumps of the pulmonary arteries using 2 large-bore Foley catheters. This study analyzed procedural explant times, postoperative outcomes, primary graft dysfunction (PGD), duration of mechanical ventilation, length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay, and early survival after LTx.ResultsA total of 56 cDCD lungs were transplanted during the study period. In 7 cases (12.5%), the heart was also procured (heart + lung group); in 49 cases (87.5%), only the lungs were explanted (lung group). Basic donor parameters were comparable in the 2 groups. The median times from circulatory arrest to lung perfusion (24 minutes vs 13.5 minutes; P = .002) and from skin incision to lung perfusion (14 minutes vs 5 minutes; P = .005) were significantly longer for the heart + lung procedures. However, this did not affect post-transplantation PGD grade at 0 hours (P = .851), 24 hours (P = .856), 48 hours (P = .929), and 72 hours (P = .874). At 72 hours after transplantation, none of the lungs in the heart + lung group but 1 lung (2.2%) in lung group was in PGD 3. The median duration of mechanical ventilation (50 hours vs 41 hours; P = .801), length of ICU stay (8 days vs 6 days; P = .951), and total length of hospital stay (27 days vs 25 days; P = .814) were also comparable in the 2 groups. In-hospital mortality occurred in only 1 patient of the lung group (2.2%).ConclusionsAlthough prioritized cDCD heart explantation is associated with delayed ventilation and significantly longer warm ischemic time to the lungs, post-LTx outcomes within the first year are unchanged. Prioritizing heart perfusion and explantation in the setting of cDCD procurement can be considered acceptable.

Project description:ImportanceInvestigating outcomes after marginal allograft transplant is essential in determining appropriate and more aggressive use of these allografts.ObjectiveTo determine the time trends in the outcomes of marginal liver allografts as defined by 6 different sets of criteria.Design, setting, and participantsIn this case-control, multicenter study, 75 050 patients who received a liver transplant between March 1, 2002, and September 30, 2016, were retrospectively analyzed to last known follow-up (n = 55 395) or death (n = 19 655) using the United Network for Organ Sharing Database. The study period was divided into three 5-year eras: 2002-2006, 2007-2011, and 2012-2016. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis with log-rank test and Cox proportional hazards regression analysis were used to examine the allograft after transplant with marginal allografts, which were defined as 90th percentile Donor Risk Index allografts (calculated over the entire study period), donor after circulatory death allografts, national share allografts, old age (donors >70 years) allografts, fatty liver allografts, and 90th percentile Discard Risk Index allografts. Statistical analysis was performed from August to December 2019.Main outcomes and measuresAllograft failure after transplant as defined by the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network database.ResultsAmong the 75 050 patients (44 394 men; mean [SD] age, 54.3 [9.9] years) in the study, Donor Risk Index, patient Model for End-stage Liver Disease scores, and balance of risk scores significantly increased over time. Multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression analysis indicated that 90th percentile Donor Risk Index allograft survival increased across the study period (2002-2006: hazard ratio, 1.41 [95% CI, 1.34-1.49]; 2007-2011: hazard ratio, 1.25 [95% CI, 1.17-1.34]; 2012-2016: hazard ratio, 1.10 [95% CI, 0.98-1.24]). Secondary definitions of marginal allografts (donor after circulatory death, national share, old age donors, fatty liver, and 90th percentile Discard Risk Index) showed similar improvements in allograft survival.Conclusions and relevanceThe study's findings encourage the aggressive use of liver allografts and may indicate a need for a redefinition of allograft marginality in liver transplantation.