Concept: Lung allocation score
- The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery
- Published about 5 years ago
BACKGROUND: Preoperative extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is a risk factor for poor outcome and currently considered a contraindication to lung transplantation. The lung allocation score system was introduced in May 2005 and prioritizes lung allocation to those with the greatest respiratory impairment. The purpose of this study is to determine whether ECMO as a bridge to lung transplantation is an acceptable option to support those in respiratory failure until donor lungs become available in the lung allocation score era. METHOD: A retrospective review of 715 consecutive lung transplants performed between May 2005 and September 2011 was conducted using a prospectively collected institutional registry database. Twenty-four lung transplants (3.4%) were performed in the 31 patients with attempted pretransplant ECMO; 7 patients who received ECMO patients did not survive or were deemed unfit for transplantation. These patients were compared with a control group of 691 patients who did not receive pretransplant ECMO. RESULTS: The duration of pretransplant ECMO was 171 ± 242 hours (median, 91 hours). Venovenous ECMO was used for respiratory failure in 15 patients, whereas venoarterial ECMO was used for circulatory collapse due to pulmonary hypertension in 9 patients. Patients in the retransplant ECMO group were younger (46 ± 15 years vs 57 ± 14 years, P < .01) compared with the control group, with no difference in recipient gender (male/female: 10/14 vs 380/311), donor age (33 ± 14 years vs 36 ± 15 years), or donor gender (male/female: 10/14 vs 352/339). Emphysema was less common (1, 4% vs 260, 38%, P < .01), and cystic fibrosis (5, 21% vs 72, 10%, P = .09), redo lung transplant (3, 13% vs 28, 4%, P = .08), and bronchiectasis (2, 8% vs 6, 1%, P = .03) were more common in the pretransplant ECMO group. Patients in the pretransplant ECMO group had a significantly higher lung allocation score (87 ± 9 vs 44 ± 15, P < .01). All patients in the pretransplant ECMO group underwent double lung transplants on pump (cardiopulmonary bypass/ECMO), and single lung transplants were performed in 171 patients (25%) and pump was used in 243 patients (35%) in the control group. The cardiopulmonary bypass time was longer in the pretransplant ECMO group (277 ± 69 minutes vs 225 ± 89 minutes, P = .02), with no difference in ischemic time (343 ± 93 minutes vs 330 ± 98 minutes, P = .54). Cadaveric lobar lung transplants were performed because of the urgency to overcome size mismatch with an oversized donor more frequently in 25% (n = 6, no mortality with the longest follow-up at 6 years) of patients in the pretransplant ECMO group versus 0.3% (n = 2) of patients in the control group (P < .01). Post-transplant ECMO was used for primary graft dysfunction in 13 patients (54%) in the pretransplant ECMO group and 41 patients (6%) in the control group (P < .01). The median hospital stay was 46 days in the pretransplant ECMO group versus 27 days in the control group (P = .16). The actuarial survivals after lung transplants at 1, 3, 6, 12, and 24 months were 96%, 88%, 83%, 74%, and 74%, respectively, in the pretransplant ECMO group, and 97%, 94%, 90%, 83%, and 74%, respectively, in the control group (P = .787). CONCLUSIONS: Although the incidence of primary graft dysfunction requiring post-transplant ECMO is higher and the hospital stay is longer in patients receiving pretransplant ECMO, the graft survival is good (2-year survival, 74%). ECMO is efficacious as a bridge to lung transplantation with good post-lung transplant outcomes.
BACKGROUND: In May 2005, the Lung Allocation Score (LAS) became the primary method for determining allocation of lungs for organ transplantation for those at least 12 years of age in the United States. During the pre-LAS period, black patients were more likely than white patients to become too sick or die while awaiting transplant. The association between gender and lung transplant outcomes has not been widely studied. METHODS: Black and white patients aged ≥18 years registered on the United Network of Organ Sharing (UNOS) lung transplantation waiting list from January 1, 2000, to May 3, 2005 (pre-LAS, n = 8,765), and from May 4, 2005, to September 4, 2010 (LAS, n = 8,806), were included. Logistic regression analyses were based on smaller cohorts derived from patients listed in the first 2 years of each era (2,350 pre-LAS, and 2,446 LAS) to allow for follow-up time. Lung transplantation was the primary outcome measure. Multivariable analyses were performed within each interval to determine the odds that a patient would die or receive a lung transplant within 3 years of listing. RESULTS: In the pre-LAS era, black patients were more likely than white patients to become too sick for transplantation or die within 3 years of waiting list registration (43.8% vs 30.8%; odds ratio [OR], 1.84; p < 0.001). Race was not associated with death or becoming too sick while listed for transplantation in the LAS era (14.0% vs 13.3%; OR, 0.93; p = 0.74). Black patients were less likely to undergo transplantation in the pre-LAS era (56.3% vs 69.2%; OR, 0.54; p < 0.001) but not in the LAS era (86.0% vs 86.7%; OR, 1.07; p = 0.74). Women were more likely than men to die or become too sick for transplantation within 3 years of listing in the LAS era (16.1% vs 11.3%; OR, 1.58; p < 0.001) compared with the pre-LAS era (33.4% vs 30.7%; OR, 1.19; p = 0.08). CONCLUSION: Racial disparities in lung transplantation have decreased with the implementation of LAS as the method of organ allocation; however, gender disparities may have actually increased in the LAS era.
To clarify the significance of recipient gender status on lung transplant outcomes in a large single institution experience spanning three decades.
On May 4, 2005, the system for allocation of deceased donor lungs for transplant in the United States changed from allocation based on waiting time to allocation based on the lung allocation score (LAS). We sought to determine the effect of the LAS on lung transplantation in the United States.
Center Volume and Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Support at Lung Transplantation in the Lung Allocation Score Era
- American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine
- Published almost 2 years ago
Outcomes related to extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) used to bridge patients to lung transplantation in the context of center differences in transplant expertise have not been investigated.
The lung allocation score (LAS) system has been implemented to reduce waiting list time and mortality in the USA, but it remains uncertain how the LAS would reflect the impairment in health-related quality of life (HRQOL), which is another lung transplantation treatment goal to be improved in addition to survival. We thus investigated the relationships of the LAS with mortality and HRQOL in Japanese lung transplantation candidates.
The lung allocation score (LAS) has changed organ allocation for lung transplantation in the United States. Previous investigations of transplant recipients reported an association between high LAS and an increased risk of death after lung transplantation. We hypothesize that a high LAS predicts survival in lung transplant recipients with cystic fibrosis (CF) in the United Network for Organ Sharing Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients database.
This article provides a summary of the changes in lung transplantation after implementation of the Lung Allocation Score in 2005. Specific issues that are addressed include impact of diagnosis group, age, critical illness, and geographic disparities in transplant.
Rates of repeat lung transplantation have increased since implementation of the lung allocation score (LAS). The purpose of this study is to compare survival between repeat (ReTx) and primary (LTx) lung transplant recipients in the LAS era.
Introduction: Pulmonary veno-occlusive disease (PVOD) is an uncommon cause of pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH). However, unlike PAH, treatment options for PVOD are usually quite limited. The impact of the lung allocation score on access to transplantation for PVOD patients, and the clinical course of these patients, have not been well-described. Methods: Patients with a diagnosis of PVOD and PAH registered on the United Network for Organ Sharing wait list for transplantation from May 4, 2005-May 3, 2013 were included. Lung transplantation was the primary outcome measure. Multivariable analyses were performed to determine the odds of dying or receiving a lung transplant after listing. Survival was compared using Kaplan-Meier and competing risks methods. Results: Of 12,251 patients listed for lung transplantation, 49 with PVOD and 647 with PAH were identified. There were no significant differences in the lung allocation score between PVOD and PAH patients at listing, transplant, or wait list removal for death/ too sick for transplant. By 6 months, 22.6% of PVOD patients had been removed from the wait list due to death, compared to 11.0% of PAH patients (Chi square p=0.03). PVOD patients who died or were considered too sick for transplant were removed from the waiting list sooner after listing (22 vs. 105 days, p=0.08). There was no difference in the proportion of PVOD and PAH patients transplanted (50.0% vs. 47.6%, p=0.60). Conclusion: In the lung allocation score era, PVOD patients may be at higher risk for death while on the transplant waiting list. After wait list registration, close monitoring for disease progression is advised.