Dataset Information

Lung Transplantation in Systemic Sclerosis: a Practice Survey of United States Lung Transplant Centers

ABSTRACT: Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text. Background. Lung transplantation in patients with systemic sclerosis (SSc) can be complicated by extrapulmonary manifestations of the disease, leading to concerns regarding posttransplant complications and outcomes.

Methods.

We conducted a web-based survey of adult lung transplant programs in the United States regarding their practices in patients with SSc.

Results.

Sixty percent (37/62) of the eligible centers responded to the survey, majority of the respondents were medical directors (81%). Most centers would consider transplanting patients with mild or moderate esophageal disease (92% or 75%, respectively) or gastroparesis (59%). A minority would consider patients with severe esophageal dysmotility (37%), digital ulcers (21%), or low body mass index (19%). Most centers conducted extensive pretransplant gastrointestinal evaluation and use a conservative feeding approach with prolonged nothing by mouth (83%) and postpyloric feeding (89%). Antireflux surgery is commonly considered (40%) with partial fundoplication being the procedure of choice (67%). Most respondents expected similar outcomes of acute or chronic rejection (81% and 51%, respectively), respiratory infections (76%), and 1-year survival (70%).

Conclusions.

Most US lung transplant centers do not universally exclude SSc from lung transplant listing, but most support extensive pretransplant gastrointestinal testing and a conservative approach to feeding in the early posttransplant period.

SUBMITTER: Sehgal S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8425834 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:RATIONALE:In the United States, an algorithm known as the "match-run" creates an ordered ranking of potential recipients for available lung allografts. A potential recipient's match-run position, or "sequence number," is available to the transplant center when contacted with a lung offer. Lung offers with higher sequence numbers may be interpreted as a crowd-sourced evaluation of poor organ quality, though the association between the sequence number at which a lung is accepted and its recipient's post-transplant outcomes is unclear. OBJECTIVES:We sought to evaluate the primary reasons provided when a lung offer was refused by a transplant center, transplant center and donor/organ factors associated with a higher sequence number at acceptance, and the association of the sequence number at acceptance with post-transplant mortality and graft failure. METHODS:Match-run outcomes for lung offers that occurred in the United States from May 2007 through June 2014 were merged with recipient follow-up data through December 2017. Associations between the sequence number at the time of acceptance and selected transplant center and donor characteristics were estimated using multivariable logistic and multinomial regression models. The associations between the final sequence number and recipient survival and graft survival were estimated using multivariable time-to-event models. RESULTS:Of 10,981 lung offer acceptances, nearly 70% were accepted by one of the top 10 ranked candidates. Higher median annual center volume and potential indicators of organ quality (e.g., abnormal chest radiograph or bronchoscopy) were associated with a higher sequence number at acceptance. There was weak evidence for a small positive relationship between the sequence number at acceptance and both mortality and graft failure. For example, the unadjusted and adjusted hazard ratios for death associated with the log-sequence number at acceptance were 1.019 (95% confidence interval, 1.001-1.038) and 1.011 (95% confidence interval, 0.989-1.033), respectively. On the absolute scale, using the multivariable model, a 10-fold increase in the sequence number translated into a 0.8% absolute decline in the predicted 5-year survival. CONCLUSIONS:Acceptance of a donor lung offer at a later point in the match-run was associated with measurable indicators of organ quality, but not with clinically meaningful differences in post-transplant mortality or graft failure.