Abstract

Incidental pulmonary embolism (PE) is a challenging entity with unclear treatment implications. Our program performs routine ventilation-perfusion (VQ) scans at 3-months post-transplant to establish airway and vascular function. We sought to determine the prevalence and prognostic implications of mismatched perfusion defects (MMPD) found on these studies, hypothesizing they would be associated with a benign prognosis. We studied VQ scans obtained routinely at 3-months post-transplant from double lung transplant recipients 2005-2016 for studies with MMPD interpreted as high or intermediate probability for PE. We tested the relationship between MMPD and 1-year survival via chi square testing, overall survival via Kaplan Meier analysis with log rank testing and peak forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) percent predicted via t-testing. Three hundred and seventy-three patients met inclusion criteria, of whom 35 (9%) had VQ scans with MMPDs interpreted by radiologists as high or intermediate probability for PE. Baseline recipient and donor characteristics were similar between groups. Seven patients (20%) in the MMPD group were treated with therapeutic anticoagulation. Patients with MMPD had similar 1-year survival (100%vs. 98%, P=1.00), overall survival (log rank P=.90) and peak FEV1% predicted (94% [SD 20%] vs. 92% [SD 21%]; P=.58). Anticoagulation did not affect these relationships. Mismatched perfusion defects on routine post-transplant VQ scan were not associated with a difference in survival or lung function. A conservative approach to these changes may be a viable option in the absence of other anticoagulation indications.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.