Outcomes of Extremely Prolonged (> 50 d) Venovenous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Support.

OBJECTIVES: There has been a sustained increase in the utilization of venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) over the last decade, further exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. We set out to describe our institutional experience with extremely prolonged (> 50 d) venovenous ECMO support for recovery or bridge to lung transplant candidacy in patients with acute respiratory failure. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: A large tertiary urban care center. PATIENTS: Patients 18 years or older receiving venovenous ECMO support for greater than 50 days, with initial cannulation between January 2018 and January 2022. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: One hundred thirty patients were placed on venovenous ECMO during the study period. Of these, 12 received prolonged (> 50 d) venovenous ECMO support. Eleven patients (92%) suffered from adult respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) secondary to COVID-19, while one patient with prior bilateral lung transplant suffered from ARDS secondary to bacterial pneumonia. The median age of patients was 39 years (interquartile range [IQR], 35-51 yr). The median duration of venovenous ECMO support was 94 days (IQR, 70-128 d), with a maximum of 180 days. Median time from intubation to cannulation was 5 days (IQR, 2-14 d). Nine patients (75%) were successfully mobilized while on venovenous ECMO support. Successful weaning of venovenous ECMO support occurred in eight patients (67%); 6 (50%) were bridged to lung transplantation and 2 (17%) were bridged to recovery. Of those successfully weaned, seven patients (88%) were discharged from the hospital. All seven patients discharged from the hospital were alive 6 months post-decannulation; 83% (5/6) with sufficient follow-up time were alive 1-year after decannulation. CONCLUSIONS: Our experience suggests that extremely prolonged venovenous ECMO support to allow native lung recovery or optimization for lung transplantation may be a feasible strategy in select critically ill patients, further supporting the expanded utilization of venovenous ECMO for refractory respiratory failure.

Simultaneous heart-kidney transplant in patients with borderline estimated glomerular filtration rate without dialysis dependency.

BACKGROUND: Appropriate patient selection for simultaneous heart-kidney transplantation (sHK) in patients with moderate renal dysfunction remains challenging. METHODS: From the United Network for Organ Sharing database (2003-2020), we identified 5678 adults with an estimated pre-transplant glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) between 30 and 45 mL/min/1.73 m2 and no pre-transplant dialysis. Patients undergoing sHK (n = 293) were compared with those undergoing heart transplantation alone (n = 5385) using 1:3 propensity score matching. RESULTS: The sHK utilization rate increased from 1.8% in 2003 to 12.2% in 2020 (p < .001). After matching, 1 and 5-year survival was 87.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] 83.3-91.0) and 80.0% (95% CI 74.2-84.6) after sHK, and 87.3% (95% CI 85.2-89.1) and 71.8% (95% CI 68.4-74.9) after heart transplant alone (p = .04). In the subgroup analysis, sHK was associated with a 5-year survival benefit only in patients with 30 < eGFR ≤ 35 mL/min/1.73 m2 (p = .05) but not in those with 35 < eGFR < 45 mL/min/1.73 m2 (p = .45). Patients who underwent heart transplants alone also had a higher incidence of becoming chronic dialysis-dependent after transplant within 5-year follow-up (10.2%, 95% CI 8.0-12.6 vs. 3.8%, 95% CI 1.7-7.1, p = .004). The 5-year incidence of subsequent kidney waitlisting and transplants after heart transplants alone was 5.6% and 1.9%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Among propensity-matched patients without pre-transplant dialysis, compared to heart transplants alone, sHK had improved 5-year survival in those with 30 < eGFR ≤ 35 but not in those with 35 < eGFR < 45 mL/min/1.73 m2 . One-year survival was similar irrespective of eGFR. Receiving a kidney after a heart transplant alone is rare under the current allocation system.

Long-term outcomes after heart transplantation using ex vivo allograft perfusion in standard risk donors: A single-center experience.

INTRODUCTION: The Organ Care System (OCS) is an ex vivo perfusion platform for donor heart preservation. Short/mid-term post-transplant outcomes after its use are comparable to standard cold storage (CS). We evaluated long-term outcomes following its use. METHODS: Between 2011 and 2013, 38 patients from a single center were randomized as a part of the PROCEED II trial to receive allografts preserved with CS (n = 19) or OCS (n = 19). Endpoints included 8-year survival, survival free from graft-related deaths, freedom from cardiac allograft vasculopathy (CAV), non-fatal major adverse cardiac events (NF-MACE), and rejections. RESULTS: Eight-year survival was 57.9% in the OCS group and 73.7% in the CS group (p = .24). Freedom from CAV was 89.5% in the OCS group and 67.8% in the CS group (p = .13). Freedom from NF-MACE was 89.5% in the OCS group and 67.5% in the CS group (p = .14). Eight-year survival free from graft-related death was equivalent between the two groups (84.2% vs. 84.2%, p = .93). No differences in rejection episodes were observed (all p > .5). CONCLUSIONS: In select patients receiving OCS preserved allografts, late post-transplant survival trended lower than those transplanted with an allograft preserved with CS. This is based on a small single-center series, and larger numbers are needed to confirm these findings.

Heart transplant recipient 1-year outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic initially brought forth considerable challenges to the field of heart transplantation. To prevent the spread of the virus and protect immunocompromised recipients, our center made the following modifications to post-transplant outpatient management: eliminating early coronary angiograms, video visits for postoperative months 7, 9, and 11, and home blood draws for immunosuppression adjustments. To assess if these changes have impacted patient outcomes, the current study examines 1-year outcomes for patients transplanted during the pandemic. Between March and September 2020, we assessed 50 heart transplant patients transplanted during the pandemic. These patients were compared to patients who were transplanted during the same months between 2011 and 2019 (n = 482). Endpoints included subsequent 1-year survival, freedom from cardiac allograft vasculopathy, any-treated rejection, acute cellular rejection, antibody-mediated rejection, nonfatal major adverse cardiac events (NF-MACE), and hospital and ICU length of stay. Patients transplanted during the pandemic had similar 1-year endpoints compared to those of patients transplanted from years prior apart from 1-year freedom from NF-MACE which was significantly higher for patients transplanted during the pandemic. Despite necessary changes being made to outpatient management of heart transplant recipients, heart transplantation continues to be safe and effective with similar 1-year outcomes to years prior.

Heart transplantation after total artificial heart bridging-Outcomes over 15 years.

BACKGROUND: Data are limited on outcomes after heart transplantation in patients bridged-to-transplantation (BTT) with a total artificial heart (TAH-t). METHODS: The UNOS database was used to identify 392 adult patients undergoing heart transplantation after TAH-t BTT between 2005 and 2020. They were compared with 11 014 durable left ventricular assist device (LVAD) BTT patients and 22 348 de novo heart transplants (without any durable VAD or TAH-t BTT) during the same period. RESULTS: TAH-t BTT patients had increased dialysis dependence compared to LVAD BTT and de novo transplants (24.7% vs. 2.7% vs. 3.8%) and higher levels of baseline creatinine and total bilirubin (all p < .001). After transplantation, TAH-t BTT patients were more likely to die from multiorgan failure in the first year (25.0% vs. 16.1% vs. 16.1%, p = .04). Ten-year survival was inferior in TAH-t BTT patients (TAH-t BTT 53.1%, LVAD BTT 61.8%, De Novo 62.6%, p < .001), while 10-year survival conditional on 1-year survival was similar (TAH-t BTT 66.8%, LVAD BTT 68.7%, De Novo 69.0%, all p > .20). Among TAH-t BTT patients, predictors of 1-year mortality included higher baseline creatinine and total bilirubin, mechanical ventilation, and cumulative center volume <20 cases of heart transplantation involving TAH-t BTT (all p < .05). CONCLUSION: Survival after TAH-t BTT is acceptable, and patients who survive the early postoperative phase experience similar hazards of mortality over time compared to de novo transplant patients and durable LVAD BTT patients.

Rapidly Growing Mycobacterium tuberculosis in the Form of Empyema Necessitans: A Case Report.

We present a case of rapidly growing disseminated Mycobacterium tuberculosis (MTB) that presented as an empyema necessitans (EN) in a 65-year-old woman with a single right lung transplant admitted for progressive dyspnea. While hospitalized, she had daily fevers and was found to have a right-sided chest wall abscess and pleural effusion. Acid-fast bacilli cultures from the abscess and pleural fluid grew MTB within 4 and 6 days, respectively. Blood cultures later grew MTB as well. Upon initiation of rifampin, isoniazid, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol, she developed hemorrhagic pancreatitis and distributive shock secondary to antituberculosis medications and disseminated MTB. Noteworthy features of this case include the rapid rate of MTB culture growth in less than a week, the development of a likely donor-derived MTB EN, and the clinical challenges of MTB screening and MTB infection management in a solid organ transplant recipient.

Heart transplantation in the era of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: Is it safe and feasible?

As the SARS-CoV-2-pandemic continues to unfold, the number of heart transplants completed in the United States has been declining steadily. The current case series examines the immediate short-term outcomes of seven heart transplant recipients transplanted during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. We hope to illustrate that with proper preparation, planning, and testing, heart transplantation can be continued during a pandemic. We assessed 7 patients transplanted from March 4, 2020, to April 15, 2020. The following endpoints were noted: in-hospital survival, in-hospital freedom from rejection, in-hospital nonfatal major cardiac adverse events (NF-MACE), severe primary graft dysfunction, hospital length of stay, and ICU length of stay. There were no expirations throughout the hospital admission. In addition, there were no patients with NF-MACE or treated rejection, and 1 patient developed severe primary graft dysfunction. Average length of stay was 17.2 days with a standard deviation of 5.9 days. ICU length of stay was 7.7 days with a standard deviation of 2.3 days. Despite the decreasing trend in completed heart transplants due to SARS-CoV-2, heart transplantation appears to be feasible in the immediate short term. Further follow-up is needed, however, to assess the impact of SARS-CoV-2 on post-heart transplant outcomes months after transplantation.

Robotic-assisted lung transplantation: First in man.

Lung transplantation remains the best option for patients with end-stage lung disease. However, this operation has historically carried significant potential morbidity. To improve near-term patient outcomes, attempts have been made to decrease invasiveness, but this is limited by the complex nature of the operation and the anatomy of the chest. To facilitate further reduction in incision size and augment our existing minimally invasive approach, we developed a novel technique utilizing the Da Vinci robotic system to implant a right lung in a 69-year-old recipient.

Organ Utilization Rates from Non-Ideal Donors for Solid Organ Transplant in the United States.

Background: Non-ideal donors provide acceptable allografts and may expand the donor pool. This study evaluates donor utilization across solid organs over 15-years in the United States. Methods: We analyzed the OPTN STAR database to identify potential donors across three donor eras: 2005-2009, 2010-2014, and 2015-2019. Donors were analyzed by a composite Donor Utilization Score (DUS), comprised of donor age and comorbidities. Outcomes of interest were overall and organ-specific donor utilization. Descriptive analyses and multivariable logistic regression modeling were performed. p-values < 0.01 considered significant. Results: Of 132,465 donors, 32,710 (24.7%) were identified as non-ideal donors (NID), based on a DUS ≥ 3. Compared to ideal donors (ID), NID were older (median 56 years, IQR 51-64 years vs. 35 years, 22-48 years, p < 0.001) and more frequently female (44.3% vs. 39.1%, p < 0.001), Black (22.1% vs. 14.6%, p < 0.001) and obese (60.7% vs. 19.6%, p < 0.001). The likelihood of overall DBD utilization from NID increased from Era 1 to Era 2 (OR 1.227, 95% CI 1.123-1.341, p < 0.001) and Era 3 (OR 1.504, 1.376-1.643, p < 0.001), while DCD donor utilization in NID was not statistically different across Eras. Compared to Era 1, the likelihood of DBD utilization from NID for kidney transplantation was lower in Era 2 (OR 0.882, 0.822-0.946) and Era 3 (OR 0.938, 0.876-1.004, p = 0.002). The likelihood of NID utilization increased in Era 3 compared to Era 1 for livers (OR 1.511, 1.411-1.618, p < 0.001), hearts (OR 1.623, 1.415-1.862, p < 0.001), and lungs (OR 2.251, 2.011-2.520, p < 0.001). Conclusions: Using a universal definition of NID across organs, NID donor utilization is increasing; however, use of DUS may improve resource utilization in identifying donors at highest likelihood for multi-organ donation.

Heart transplantation in patients from socioeconomically distressed communities.

BACKGROUND: Studies examining heart transplantation disparities have focused on individual factors such as race or insurance status. We characterized the impact of a composite community socioeconomic disadvantage index on heart transplantation outcomes. METHODS: From the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR), we identified 49,340 primary, isolated adult heart transplant candidates and 32,494 recipients (2005-2020). Zip code-level socioeconomic disadvantage was characterized using the Distressed Community Index (DCI: 0-most prosperous, 100-most distressed) based on education, poverty, unemployment, housing vacancies, median income, and business growth. Patients from distressed communities (DCI ≥ 80) were compared to all others. RESULTS: Patients from distressed communities were more often non-white, less educated, and had public insurance (all p < 0.01). Distressed patients were more likely to require ventricular assist devices at listing (29.4 vs 27.1%) and before transplant (44.8 vs 42.0%, both p < 0.001), and they underwent transplants at lower-volume centers (23 vs 26 cases/year, p < 0.01). Distressed patients had higher 1-year waitlist mortality or deterioration (12.3% [95% confidence interval (CI) 11.6-13.0] vs 10.9% [95% CI 10.5-11.3]) and inferior 5-year survival (75.3% [95% CI 74.0-76.5] vs 79.5% [95% CI 79.0-80.0]) (both p < 0.001). After adjustment, living in a distressed community was independently associated with an increased risk of waitlist mortality or deterioration hazard ratio (HR 1.10, 95% CI 1.02-1.18) and post-transplant mortality (HR 1.13, 95% CI 1.06-1.20). CONCLUSIONS: Patients from socioeconomically distressed communities have worse waitlist and post-transplant mortality. These findings should not be used to limit access to heart transplantation, but rather highlight the need for further studies to elucidate mechanisms underlying the impact of community-level socioeconomic disparity.

Limited cumulative experience with ex vivo lung perfusion is associated with inferior outcomes after lung transplantation.

OBJECTIVE: Ex vivo lung perfusion (EVLP) allows for prolonged preservation and evaluation/resuscitation of donor lungs. We evaluated the influence of center experience with EVLP on lung transplant outcomes. METHODS: We identified 9708 isolated, first-time adult lung transplants from the United Network for Organ Sharing database (March 1, 2018-March 1, 2022), 553 (5.7%) involved using donor lungs after EVLP. Using the total volume of EVLP lung transplants per center during the study period, centers were dichotomized into low- (1-15 cases) and high-volume (>15 cases) EVLP centers. RESULTS: Forty-one centers performed EVLP lung transplants, including 26 low-volume and 15 high-volume centers (median volume, 3 vs 23 cases; P < .001). Recipients at low-volume centers (n = 109) had similar baseline comorbidities compared with high-volume centers (n = 444). Low-volume centers used numerically more donation after circulatory death donors (37.6 vs 28.4%; P = .06) and more donors with Pao2/Fio2 ratio <300 (24.8 vs 9.7%; P < .001). After EVLP lung transplants, low-volume centers had worse 1-year survival (77.8% vs 87.5%; P = .007), with an adjusted hazard ratio of 1.63 (95% CI, 1.06-2.50, adjusting for recipient age, sex, diagnosis, lung allocation score, donation after circulatory death donor, donor Pao2/Fio2 ratio, and total annual lung transplant volume per center). When compared to non-EVLP lung transplants, 1-year survival of EVLP lung transplants was significantly worse at low-volume centers (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.09; 95% CI, 1.47-2.97) but similar at high-volume centers (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.82-1.58). CONCLUSIONS: The use of EVLP in lung transplantation remains limited. Increasing cumulative EVLP experience is associated with improved outcomes of lung transplantation using EVLP-perfused allografts.

Descending Thoracic and Thoracoabdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repairs: The Society of Thoracic Surgeons Adult Cardiac Surgery Database Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Contemporary national outcomes of open and endovascular aortic repair for descending thoracic aortic aneurysms (DTAAs) and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs) are unclear. This study evaluated this issue by using The Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) Adult Cardiac Surgery Database (ACSD). METHODS: From July 1, 2017 to June 30, 2022, study investigators identified 3522 adults who underwent planned DTAA repair (open, 328; endovascular, 1895) or TAAA repair (open, 870; endovascular, 429), after excluding ascending aorta or aortic arch aneurysms (zone 0, 1, or 2), interventions with a proximal extent in zone 0 or zone 1, juxtarenal or infrarenal aortic interventions, hybrid procedures, aortic trauma, and aortic infection. RESULTS: Most DTAA interventions (85.2%) were endovascular repairs, whereas most TAAA interventions were open repairs (66.9%). For DTAA interventions, the operative mortality, permanent stroke rate, and rate of spinal cord injury were 4.2%, 3.8%, and 2.4% for endovascular repairs and 9.2%, 8.5%, and 4.6% for open repairs, respectively (all P < .05). For TAAA interventions, the operative mortality, permanent stroke rate, and rate of spinal cord injury were 6.5%, 2.1%, and 3.0% for endovascular repairs and 11.7%, 6.0%, and 12.2% for open repairs, respectively (all P < .05). Increasing annual open TAAA repair volume was associated with lower odds of experiencing the composite of operative mortality, permanent stroke, or spinal cord injury. CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of STS ACSD data, endovascular repair was the predominant approach for treating DTAA, whereas most patients undergoing TAAA interventions had an open surgical repair. Outcome differences between open and endovascular approaches may be related to patient selection. Increasing center experience with open TAAA repair is associated with improved outcomes.

Centralized Static Ex-Vivo Lung Perfusion in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Ex-vivo lung perfusion (EVLP) may improve donor lung utilization but requires significant infrastructure and expertise. Centralized EVLP facilities may mitigate these requirements. METHODS: From the United Network for Organ Sharing database, we identified 345 adults undergoing isolated, first-time lung transplantation using donor lungs perfused by static EVLP (03/01/2018-12/31/2022). Recipients of lungs perfused at centralized EVLP facilities (n=165) were compared to recipients of lungs perfused at individual transplant centers (n=180). Propensity score matching was used to create balanced groups for comparison. RESULTS: Centralized EVLP facilities were increasingly utilized from 2018 to 2022 (35.3 vs. 55.8%, p=0.04) and were more likely used when the annual center volume of EVLP lung transplants was low. Compared to allografts placed on EVLP at individual transplant centers, those placed on EVLP at centralized facilities had longer median ischemic time (11.3 vs. 9.6 hours, p<0.001) and were less likely to come from donation after circulatory death donors (25.4 vs. 39.5%, p=0.003) or be used for double lung transplant (73.3 vs. 83.9%, p=0.02). In 102 well-matched recipients, 2-year survival was equivalent between those receiving allografts perfused at centralized facilities (77.9% [95% CI 68.0-85.1%]) versus individual transplant centers (77.7% [95% CI 67.8-84.9%], p=0.90). Multivariable Cox regression analysis also showed equivalent 2-year survival (adjusted hazard ratio 1.02, 95% CI 0.57-1.84, p=0.95). CONCLUSIONS: Transplanting lung allografts that underwent static EVLP at centralized facilities had similar outcomes compared to transplanting lungs perfused at individual transplant centers. The centralized model of clinical EVLP can potentially improve access to EVLP.

Impact of minimally invasive lung transplantation on early outcomes and analgesia use: A matched cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive (MI) approaches to lung transplantation (LTx) offer the prospect of faster recovery compared to traditional incisions, however, little data exist describing the impact of surgical technique on early outcomes and analgesia use. METHODS: A prospectively maintained institutional registry identified 170 patients who underwent LTx between January, 2017 and June, 2022. Post-COVID acute respiratory distress syndrome, repeat, and multiorgan transplants were excluded (n = 27) leaving 37 MILTx and 106 traditional LTx patients. Propensity score matching by age, sex, body mass index, diagnosis, lung allocation score, double vs. single lung, hypertension, diabetes, and hospitalization status created 37 pairs. RESULTS: Before matching, MILTx patients were more often male (70% vs 43%) and more likely to receive grafts from younger (31 vs 42 years), circulatory death donors (19% vs 6%) compared with traditional LTx patients (all p < 0.05). After matching, there were no differences in graft warm ischemia or operative duration (both p > 0.05). Postoperatively, MILTx experienced shorter intensive care unit (ICU) (4.3 [IQR 3.1-5.5] vs 8.2 [IQR 3.7-10.8] days) and hospital lengths of stay (LOS) (13 [IQR 11-15] vs 17 [IQR 12-25] days) (both p < 0.05). Among patients surviving to discharge, MILTx patients required fewer opioid prescriptions at discharge (38% vs 66%, p = 0.008) and had improved pulmonary function at 3 months (Forced expiratory volume in 1 second 82 [IQR 72-102] vs 77 [IQR 52-88]% predicted; forced vital capacity 78 [IQR 65-92] vs 70 [IQR 62-80]% predicted] (both p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Minimally invasive LTx techniques demonstrate potential advantages over traditional approaches, including reduced ICU and hospital LOS, lower opioid use on discharge, and improved early pulmonary function.

Real-time transcription polymerase chain reaction cycle threshold values as criteria for utilization of incidental COVID-19 positive lung donors.

Shortage of organ donors is an ongoing limiting factor in lung transplantation (LT). Despite increasing prevalence of asymptomatic COVID-19 infection, positive COVID-19 testing from a potential donor remains a contraindication at many LT centers. In this report, we present the outcomes of LT utilizing an algorithm based on donor clinical presentation, and COVID-19 real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) with cycle threshold (Ct) values evaluation. The Ct value threshold for organ acceptance was >35. A total of 8 COVID-positive donors were included. No donor-to-recipient transmissions of COVID-19 were observed. Short-term outcomes were comparable to those reported in pre-COVID literature. Survival-to-date is 100% with median POD of 161 days. Our findings support the safety and efficacy of utilizing our algorithm including Ct value threshold for selection of donors with incidental COVID-19 positive testing.

Temporary Mechanical Circulatory Support in Patients with Cardiogenic Shock: Clinical Characteristics and Outcomes.

Patients with cardiogenic shock may require stabilization with temporary mechanical circulatory support (tMCS) to assess candidacy for definitive therapy, including heart transplantation (HTx) or durable MCS, and/or maintain stability while on the HTx waiting list. We describe the clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with cardiogenic shock who underwent intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) vs. Impella [Abiomed, Danvers, MA, USA] placement at a high-volume advanced heart failure center. We assessed patients ≥ 18 years who received IABP or Impella support for cardiogenic shock from 1 January 2020 to 31 December 2021. Ninety patients were included, 59 (65.6%) with IABP and 31 (34.4%) with Impella. Impella was used more frequently in less stable patients, as evidenced by higher inotrope scores, greater ventilator support, and worse renal function. While patients on Impella support had higher in-hospital mortality, despite the worse cardiogenic shock in patients for whom clinicians chose Impella support, over 75% were successfully stabilized to recovery or transplantation. Clinicians elect Impella support over IABP for less stable patients, though a high proportion are successfully stabilized. These findings demonstrate the heterogeneity of the cardiogenic shock patient population and may inform future trials to assess the role of different tMCS devices.

Bridging with surgically placed microaxial left ventricular assist devices: a high-volume centre experience.

OBJECTIVES: The Impella 5.0 and 5.5 have largely superseded non-ambulatory temporary mechanical support devices; yet, clinical outcomes are predominantly limited to small series: this study presents the experience of a high-volume centre. METHODS: An institutional clinical registry was used to identify all patients with cardiogenic shock who underwent Impella 5.0 or 5.5 implantation from January 2014 to March 2022. The primary outcome was survival to device explantation. RESULTS: The study cohort comprised 221 patients, including 146 (66.1%) Impella 5.0 and 75 (33.9%) Impella 5.5 patients. The primary aetiology was non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy (50.7%, n = 112), ischaemic cardiomyopathy (23.1%, n = 51) and acute myocardial infarction (26.2%, n = 58). Patients were prospectively classified according to strategy as bridge to transplant (47.5%, n = 105), bridge to durable device (13.6%, n = 30) or bridge to recovery (38.9%, n = 86). Patients were predominantly Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support profile 1 or 2 (95.0%, n = 210). The median bridging duration was 14 (range 0-137) days. Device exchange, Ischaemic stroke and ipsilateral arm ischaemia occurred in 8.1% (n = 18), 2.7% (n = 6) and 1.8% (n = 4) of patients, respectively. Compared to the 75 most recent Impella 5.0 patients, Impella 5.5 patients (n = 75) had lower rates of device exchange (4.0%, n = 3 vs 13.3%, n = 10, P = 0.04). Overall, 70.1% (n = 155) of patients survived to Impella explantation. CONCLUSIONS: The Impella 5.0 and 5.5 provide safe and effective temporary mechanical support in appropriately selected patients with cardiogenic shock. The newer device generation may have a lower requirement for device exchange as compared to its predecessor.

The impact of thoracoabdominal normothermic regional perfusion on early outcomes in donation after circulatory death lung transplantation.

Thoracoabdominal normothermic regional perfusion has emerged as an alternative method to procure donation after circulatory death (DCD) hearts, but its impact on concomitantly procured lung allografts remains unclear. The United Network for Organ Sharing database identified 627 DCD donors whose hearts were procured (211 in situ perfused, 416 directly procured) between December 2019 to December 2022. Lung utilization rates were 14.9% (63/422) for in situ perfused donors and 13.8% (115/832) for directly procured donors (p = 0.80). Following transplantation, lung recipients from in situ perfused donors required numerically lower rates of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (7.7% vs 17.0%, p = 0.26) and mechanical ventilation (34.6% vs 47.2%, p = 0.29) at 72 hours. Six-month post-transplant survival was similar between groups (85.7% vs 89.1%, p = 0.67). These results suggest that the use of thoracoabdominal normothermic regional perfusion in DCD heart procurement may not adversely impact recipients of concomitantly procured lung allografts.

Lung transplantation outcomes in patients from socioeconomically distressed communities.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have demonstrated racial and gender disparities in lung allocation, but contemporary data regarding socioeconomic disparities in post-transplant outcomes are lacking. We evaluated the impact of a composite socioeconomic disadvantage index on post-transplant outcomes. METHODS: The Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients identified 27,763 adult patients undergoing isolated primary lung transplantation between 2005 and 2020. Zip code-level socioeconomic distress was characterized using the Distressed Communities Index (DCI: 0-no distress, 100-severe distress) based on education level, poverty, unemployment, housing vacancies, median income, and business growth, and patients were stratified into high (DCI ≥60) or low (DCI <60) distressed groups. RESULTS: Recipients from high-distress communities (n = 8006, 28.8%) were younger (59years [interquartile range {IQR} 50-64] vs 61years [IQR 52-66]), less often white (73 vs 85%), less likely to have a college degree (45 vs 59%), and more likely to have public insurance (57 vs 49%, all p < 0.001) compared to those from low-distress communities. Additionally, high-distress recipients were more likely to have group A diagnoses (32 vs 27%) and undergo bilateral lung transplants (72.4 vs 69.3%, all p < 0.001). Post-transplant survival at 5years was 55.7% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 54.4-56.9) in high-distress recipients and 58.2% (95% CI: 57.4-58.9) in low-distress recipients (p = 0.003). After adjustment, high distress level was independently associated with an increased risk of 5-year mortality (hazard ratio:1.09, 95% CI:1.04-1.15). CONCLUSIONS: Recipients from distressed communities are at increased mortality risk following lung transplantation. Efforts should be focused on increased resource allocation and further study to better understand factors which may mitigate this disparity.