Score Era Research Articles

Functional Status After Lung Transplantation in Older Adults in the Post-Allocation Score Era

This manuscript describes the functional status trajectory of older (age 65 or older) and younger (age 18-64) adults after lung transplantation (LT). After the implementation of the lung allocation score (LAS) in 2005, older adults became the fastest growing subgroup of recipients. Yet the impact of LT on physical function, a main determinant of quality of life in older adults, is unknown. We conducted a retrospective cohort study using United Network for Organ Sharing data on 4805 adults who received a LT during 2005-2009. We divided them into older (≥65; n = 774) and younger (18-64; n = 4031) cohorts. Functional status was measured by Karnofsky performance score (KPS). Mixed models estimated the impact of age group on the rate of functional decline starting at 1 year posttransplantation. We controlled for KPS at transplantation, gender, race, diagnosis, LAS and LT type. Age group was not associated with different rates of decline in KPS over time. On average, recipients who were older, received a single LT, or had a low KPS at transplantation had worse functional status posttransplantation when compared to their counterparts, but rarely reached disability at 48 months. Overall, LT had a positive and durable effect on physical function for both older and younger recipients.

Lung Volume Reduction Surgery (LVRS) in the Lung Allocation Score Era (LAS)

Lung Volume Reduction Surgery (LVRS) in the Lung Allocation Score Era (LAS)

Lung transplantation in patients 70 years old or older: Have outcomes changed after implementation of the lung allocation score?

The objective of the present study was to evaluate whether the outcomes of lung transplantation in patients aged 70 years or older have changed after implementation of the lung allocation score in May 2005. Patients aged 70 years or older undergoing primary lung transplantation from 1995 to 2009 were identified from the United Network for Organ Sharing registry. The primary stratification was the pre-lung allocation score era versus lung allocation score era. Risk-adjusted multivariate Cox regression and Kaplan-Meier analyses were conducted to evaluate the effect of age 70 years or older on 1-year post-transplant mortality compared with a reference cohort of patients aged 60 to 69 years. Of the overall 15,726 adult lung transplantation patients in the study period, 225 (1.4%) were 70 years old or older and 4634 (29.5%) were 60 to 69 years old. The patients aged 70 years or older were a larger cohort of overall lung transplantation patients in the lung allocation score era compared with before the lung allocation score era (3.1% vs 0.3%, P < .001). In the risk-adjusted Cox analysis, age 70 years or older was a significant risk factor for 1-year post-lung transplantation mortality in the pre-lung allocation score era (hazard ratio, 2.00; 95% confidence interval, 1.10-3.62, P = .02) but not in the lung allocation score era (hazard ratio, 1.02; 95% confidence interval, 0.71-1.46; P = .92). Similarly, Kaplan-Meier 1-year survival was significantly reduced in patients 70 years old or older versus 60 to 69 years old in the pre-lung allocation score era (56.7% vs 76.3%, P = .006) but not in the lung allocation score era (79.0% vs 80.0%, P = .72). Recipients aged 70 years or older were a larger proportion of overall lung transplantation patients after implementation of the lung allocation score. Although associated with significantly increased post-lung transplantation mortality in the pre-lung allocation score era, age 70 years or older is currently associated with outcomes comparable to those of patients aged 60 to 69 years. Therefore, age 70 years or older should not serve as an absolute contraindication to lung transplantation in the lung allocation score era.

The effect of lung size mismatch on complications and resource utilization after bilateral lung transplantation

Oversizing the lung allograft, as estimated by a donor-to-recipient predicted total lung capacity (pTLC) ratio > 1.0, was associated with improved long-term survival after lung transplantation (LTx) but could be associated with increased post-operative complications and higher resource utilization. The prospectively maintained LTx database at The Johns Hopkins Hospital was retrospectively reviewed for bilateral LTx patients in the post-Lung Allocation Score (LAS) era. Patients were grouped by pTLC ratio ≤ 1.0 (undersized) or > 1.0 (oversized). Post-operative complications and hospital charges were analyzed. The pTLC ratio was available for 70 patients: 31 were undersized and 39 oversized. Undersized patients had a higher LAS (40.4 vs 35.8, p = 0.009), were more often in the intensive care unit (ICU) pre-LTx (35% vs 10%, p = 0.01), and had a higher occurrence of primary graft dysfunction (PGD; 25% vs 5%, p = 0.013) and tracheostomy (32% vs 10%, p = 0.02), longer index hospitalizations (20 [interquartile range (IQR), 10-46] vs 16 [IQR, 12-25] days, p = 0.048), and higher index hospitalization charges ($176,247 [IQR, $137,646-$284,012] vs $158,492 [IQR, $136,250-$191,301], p = 0.04). After adjusting for LAS and pre-LTx ICU stay, a lower pTLC ratio remained associated with higher hospital charges (p = 0.049). Airway complications were more frequent and severe in undersized patients. Oversized allografts were not associated with an increase in post-LTx complications. However, LTx recipients of undersized allografts were more likely to experience PGD, tracheostomy, and had higher resource utilization. Higher acuity in the undersized group might explain these findings; however, multivariate models suggest an independent association between undersizing, PGD, and resource utilization.

Bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome occurs earlier in the post–lung allocation score era

In 2005, the time-based waiting list for lung transplantation was replaced by an illness/benefit lung allocation score (LAS). Although short-term outcomes after transplantation have been reported to be similar before and after the new system, little is known about long-term results. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of LAS on the development of bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome as well as on overall 3-year and bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome-related survival. Data obtained from the United Network for Organ Sharing were used to review 8091 patients who underwent lung transplantation from 2002 to 2008. Patients were stratified according to time of transplantation into those treated before initiation of the LAS (pre-LAS group, January 2002-April 2005, n = 3729) and those treated after implementation of the score (post-LAS group, May 2005-May 2008, n = 4362). Overall, 3-year survivals for patient groups were compared using a univariate analysis, Cox proportional hazards model to generate a relative risk, and Kaplan-Meier curve analyses. During the 3-year follow-up period, bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome developed in 22% of lung transplant recipients (n = 1801). Although the incidence of postoperative bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome development was similar between groups, post-LAS patients incurred fewer bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome-free days (609 ± 7.5 vs 682 ± 9; P <.0001; log-rank test P = .0108) than did pre-LAS patients. Overall 3-year survival was lower in post-LAS patients and approached statistical significance (P = .05). Similarly, bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome-related survival was worse for patients in the post-LAS group (log-rank test P = .01). In the current LAS era, lung transplant recipients have significantly fewer bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome-free days after 3-year follow-up. Compared with the pre-LAS population, overall and bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome-related survival appears worse in the post-LAS era. Limitation of known risk factors for development of bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome-may prove even more important in this patient population.

Prediction of Graft Dysfunction Based on Extended Criteria Donors in the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease Score Era

To explain the influence of recipient status combined with the accumulation of extended criteria donor (ECD) variables on the appearance of severe ischemia-reperfusion injury and graft survival in a model for end-stage liver disease (MELD)-based system, we analyzed our most recent consecutive liver transplantations (LTs), dividing them into two periods: 400 LTs (1992-2002; pre-MELD era) and 275 LTs (2002-2007; post-MELD era). Primary dysfunction (PD) was defined as primary graft failure that required emergency retransplantation or as initial poor function. Donor variables were included in a regression model to assess the probability of PD. Donor age, macrovesicular steatosis more than 30%, and cold ischemia time were associated with allograft dysfunction. Mean probability of PD was 14.8%, 19.2%, 27.5%, and 37.4% for ECD 0, 1, 2, and more than or equal to 3, respectively (P=0.003). Distribution of no-mild, moderate, and severe ischemia-reperfusion injuries among MELD categories was 72.53%, 24.17%, and 3.30% (MELD group=12-19); 56.52%, 36.96%, and 6.5% (MELD group=20-28); and 23.91%, 54.35%, and 21.74% (MELD group >or=29), respectively (P=0.043). The development of PD according to ECD variables was 18.8%, 18.1%, 28.0%, and 35.3% for ECD 0, 1, 2, and more than or equal to 3, respectively (P=0.047). These variables were independent predictors of PD (Cox proportional regression model): ECD 2 (relative risk [RR]=1.59; 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.25-1.62), ECD 3 (RR=2.74; 95% CI=2.38-3.13), MELD 21 to 30 (RR=1.89; 95% CI=1.32-2.06), and MELD more than or equal to 30 (RR=3.38; 95% CI=2.43-3.86). Graft survival decreased, whereas MELD and the number of ECD variables increased. The combination of three or more ECD variables and an MELD more than or equal to 29 is the worst scenario for graft success after LT.

Comparison of wait times and mortality for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis patients listed for single or bilateral lung transplantation

Lung transplantation is the one form of solid-organ transplantation in which there is the option for patients to receive one or two organs. Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) candidates can be accommodated by either procedure but the decision about these two options remains controversial. Therefore, we sought to determine whether IPF patients listed for bilateral lung transplantation only had longer wait times and higher mortality on the waiting list than those listed for single lungs only. Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) were also analyzed as a comparison group. This study was a retrospective analysis of the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network database of patients with IPF and COPD listed for lung transplantation between May 2005 and December 2007. An analysis of wait times and mortality in this era as well as the pre-lung allocation score (pre-LAS) era of 2002 to 2004 was performed. Of the 1,339 patients with IPF listed for lung transplantation, 31.7% were listed for bilateral lung transplantation only, 41% for single-lung transplantation only and 27.3% for either procedure. Patients listed for the bilateral procedure only were at greater risk of dying on the transplant list (p < 0.003), and were less likely to receive a lung transplant (p < 0.012). No difference in outcomes was seen in the COPD patients. Comparatively, in the pre-LAS era, wait times and mortality on the list for IPF patients were significantly greater for all forms of transplantation. There has been a significant improvement in wait times and mortality for IPF patients since the inception of the LAS system. Nonetheless, despite the goal of transplant equity, IPF patients listed for bilateral lung transplantation might have a clinically meaningful increased risk of pre-transplant mortality. The choice of procedures therefore needs to be made with careful consideration of patients' survival both pre- and post-transplantation. Evaluation of transplant outcomes should not only be based on post-transplant survival, but should also account for the impact of the choice of procedure.

Single lead atrial synchronised pacing in patients with cardiogenic shock after acute myocardial infarction.

A pacing system requiring only a single lead was used to establish atrial synchronised pacing in eight patients with complete atrioventricular block and cardiogenic shock following acute myocardial infarction. Spontaneous atrial activity was sensed through electrodes positioned on the pacing lead and used to trigger ventricular demand pacing. A normal atrioventricular relation could be established in each of these critically ill patients without the complexity of inserting and finding a stable position for an additional atrial sensing lead. Atrial synchronised pacing at the spontaneous sinus rate had distinct haemodynamic advantages compared with conventional ventricular pacing at 100 beats/min. Mean cardiac output for the group was 3.3 1/min with atrial synchronised pacing compared with 2.6 1/min with conventional pacing, a significant difference of 27%. Peak systolic pressure averaged respectively 91 and 73 mm Hg in the two pacing modes. With conventional ventricular pacing a pronounced phasic alteration in blood pressure was observed, dependent on the altering relation of the paced beats to spontaneous atrial activity. Atrial synchronised pacing abolished this effect and resulted in a stable blood pressure at or above the peak pressure achieved with conventional pacing. Atrial synchronised pacing with a single lead system can be established rapidly. This mode of pacing has appreciable and significant haemodynamic superiority over conventional ventricular pacing in patients with cardiogenic shock and atrioventricular block following acute myocardial infarction.