Addressing sex-based disparities in solid organ transplantation in the United States - a conference report.

Solid organ transplantation provides the best treatment for end-stage organ failure, but significant sex-based disparities in transplant access exist. On June 25, 2021, a virtual multidisciplinary conference was convened to address sex-based disparities in transplantation. Common themes contributing to sex-based disparities were noted across kidney, liver, heart, and lung transplantation, specifically the existence of barriers to referral and wait listing for women, the pitfalls of using serum creatinine, the issue of donor/recipient size mismatch, approaches to frailty and a higher prevalence of allosensitization among women. In addition, actionable solutions to improve access to transplantation were identified, including alterations to the current allocation system, surgical interventions on donor organs, and the incorporation of objective frailty metrics into the evaluation process. Key knowledge gaps and high-priority areas for future investigation were also discussed.

North American Practice-Based Recommendations for Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunts in Portal Hypertension.

Complications of portal hypertension, including ascites, gastrointestinal bleeding, hepatic hydrothorax, and hepatic encephalopathy, are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Despite few high-quality randomized controlled trials to guide therapeutic decisions, transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) creation has emerged as a crucial therapeutic option to treat complications of portal hypertension. In North America, the decision to perform TIPS involves gastroenterologists, hepatologists, and interventional radiologists, but TIPS creation is performed by interventional radiologists. This is in contrast to other parts of the world where TIPS creation is performed primarily by hepatologists. Thus, the successful use of TIPS in North America is dependent on a multidisciplinary approach and technical expertise, so as to optimize outcomes. Recently, new procedural techniques, TIPS stent technology, and indications for TIPS have emerged. As a result, practices and outcomes vary greatly across institutions and significant knowledge gaps exist. In this consensus statement, the Advancing Liver Therapeutic Approaches group critically reviews the application of TIPS in the management of portal hypertension. Advancing Liver Therapeutic Approaches convened a multidisciplinary group of North American experts from hepatology, interventional radiology, transplant surgery, nephrology, cardiology, pulmonology, and hematology to critically review existing literature and develop practice-based recommendations for the use of TIPS in patients with any cause of portal hypertension in terms of candidate selection, procedural best practices and, post-TIPS management; and to develop areas of consensus for TIPS indications and the prevention of complications. Finally, future research directions are identified related to TIPS for the management of portal hypertension.

Impact of UNOS allocation policy changes on utilization and outcomes of patients bridged to heart transplant with intra-aortic balloon pump.

OBJECTIVE: Intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) support may improve the hemodynamic profiles of patients in cardiogenic shock and bridge patients to heart transplant. In 2018, the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) introduced new heart allocation criteria that increased the waitlist status of patients with IABPs to Status 2. This study assesses the impact of this change on IABP use and outcomes of patients with IABPs. METHODS: We queried the UNOS database for first adult heart transplant candidates with IABPs listed or transplanted before and after the UNOS policy changes (October 18, 2016-October 17, 2018, or October 18, 2018-September 4, 2020). We compared post-transplant survival and waitlist outcomes using Kaplan-Meier and Fine-Gray analyses. RESULTS: Two thousand three hundred fifty-eight patients met inclusion criteria. Utilization of IABPs for hemodynamic support increased by 338% in the two years after the policy change. Patients with IABPs listed after the policy change were more likely to receive a transplant and were transplanted more quickly (p < .001). Posttransplant survival was comparable before and after the policy change (p = .056), but non-transplanted patients were more likely to be delisted post-policy change (p < .001). CONCLUSION: The UNOS allocation criteria have benefited patients bridged with an IABP, given the higher transplant rate and shorter time to transplant.

Deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism after heart transplantation.

INTRODUCTION: Venous thromboembolism (VTE), such as deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE), is an important and serious postoperative complication after heart transplantation. We sought to characterize in-hospital VTE after heart transplantation and its association with clinical outcomes. METHOD: Adult (≧18 years) patients undergoing heart transplantation from 2015 to 2019 at our center were retrospectively reviewed. Post-transplant VTE was defined as newly diagnosed venous system thrombus by imaging studies. RESULTS: There were 254 patients. The cohort's median age was 55 years. A total of 61 patients were diagnosed with VTE, including one with right atrial thrombus, 54 with upper extremity DVT in which one patient subsequently developed PE, four with lower extremity DVT, and two with upper and lower extremity DVT. The cumulative incidence of VTE was 42% at 60-days of post heart transplant. Patients with VTE had longer hospital stay (P < .001), higher in-hospital mortality (P = .010), and worse 5-year survival (P = .009). On the multivariable Cox analysis, history of DVT/PE and intubation for more than 3 days were associated with an increased risk of in hospital VTE. CONCLUSION: The incidence of VTE in heart transplant recipients is high. Post-transplant surveillance, and appropriate preventive measures and treatment strategies after diagnosis are warranted.

Impact of socioeconomic deprivation on evaluation for heart transplantation at an urban academic medical center.

INTRODUCTION: For patients with advanced heart failure, socioeconomic deprivation may impede referral for heart transplantation (HT). We examined the association of socioeconomic deprivation with listing among patients evaluated at our institution and compared this against the backdrop of our local community. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients evaluated for HT between January 2017 and December 2020. Patient demographics and clinical characteristics were recorded. Block group-level area deprivation index (ADI) decile was obtained at each patient's home address and Socioeconomic Status (SES) index was determined by patient zip code. RESULTS: In total, 400 evaluations were initiated; one international patient was excluded. Among this population, 111 (27.8%) were women, 219 (54.9%) were White, 94 (23.6%) Black, and 59 (14.8%) Hispanic. 248 (62.2%) patients were listed for transplant. Listed patients had significantly higher SES index and lower ADI compared to those who were not listed. However, after adjustment for clinical factors, ADI and SESi were not predictive of listing. Similarly, patient sex, race, and insurance did not influence the likelihood of listing for HT. Notably, the distribution of the referral cohort based on ADI deciles was not reflective of our center's catchment area, indicating opportunities for improving access to transplant for disadvantaged populations. CONCLUSIONS: Although socioeconomic deprivation did not predict listing in our analysis, we recognize the need for broader outreach to combat upstream bias that prevents patients from being referred for HT.

Prevalence and predictors of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among solid organ transplant recipients with confirmed infection.

It remains uncertain whether immunocompromised patients including solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients will have a robust antibody response to SARS-CoV-2 infection. We enrolled all adult SOT recipients at our center with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection who underwent antibody testing with a single commercially available anti-nucleocapsid antibody test at least 7 days after diagnosis in a retrospective cohort. Seventy SOT recipients were studied (56% kidney, 19% lung, 14% liver ± kidney, and 11% heart ± kidney recipients). Thirty-six (51%) had positive anti-nucleocapsid antibody testing, and 34 (49%) were negative. Recipients of a kidney allograft were less likely to have positive antibody testing compared to those who did not receive a kidney (p = .04). In the final multivariable model, the years from transplant to diagnosis (OR 1.26, p = .002) and baseline immunosuppression with more than two agents (OR 0.26, p = .03) were significantly associated with the antibody test result, controlling for kidney transplantation. In conclusion, among SOT recipients with confirmed infection, only 51% of patients had detectable anti-nucleocapsid antibodies, and transplant-related variables including the level and nature of immunosuppression were important predictors. These findings raise the concern that SOT recipients with COVID-19 may be less likely to form SARS-CoV-2 antibodies.

T cell repertoire analysis suggests a prominent bystander response in human cardiac allograft vasculopathy.

T cells are implicated in the pathogenesis of cardiac allograft vasculopathy (CAV), yet their clonality, specificity, and function are incompletely defined. Here we used T cell receptor ß chain (TCRB) sequencing to study the T cell repertoire in the coronary artery, endomyocardium, and peripheral blood at the time of retransplant in four cases of CAV and compared it to the immunoglobulin heavy chain variable region (IGHV) repertoire from the same samples. High-dimensional flow cytometry coupled with single-cell PCR was also used to define the T cell phenotype. Extensive overlap was observed between intragraft and blood TCRBs in all cases, a finding supported by robust quantitative diversity metrics. In contrast, blood and graft IGHV repertoires from the same samples showed minimal overlap. Coronary infiltrates included CD4+ and CD8+ memory T cells expressing inflammatory (IFNγ, TNFα) and profibrotic (TGFß) cytokines. These were distinguishable from the peripheral blood based on memory, activation, and tissue residency markers (CD45RO, CTLA-4, and CD69). Importantly, high-frequency rearrangements were traced back to endomyocardial biopsies (2-6 years prior). Comparison with four HLA-mismatched blood donors revealed a repertoire of shared TCRBs, including a subset of recently described cross-reactive sequences. These findings provide supportive evidence for an active local intragraft bystander T cell response in late-stage CAV.

How can we better inform our patients about post-heart transplantation survival? A conditional survival analysis.

BACKGROUND: Conditional survival (CS) is a dynamic method of survival analysis that provides an estimate of how an individual's future survival probability changes based on time post-transplant, individual characteristics, and post-transplant events. This study sought to provide post-transplant CS probabilities for heart transplant recipients based on different prognostic variables and provide a discussion tool for the providers and the patients. METHODS: Adult heart transplant recipients from January 1, 2004, through October 18, 2018, were identified in the UNOS registry. CS probabilities were calculated using data from Kaplan-Meier survival estimates. RESULTS: CS probability exceeded actuarial survival probability at all times post-transplant. Women had similar short-term, but greater long-term CS than men at all times post-transplant (10-year CS 1.8-11.5% greater [95% CI 1.2-12.9]). Patients with ECMO or a surgical BiVAD had decreased survival at the time of transplant, but their CS was indistinguishable from all others by 1-year post-transplant. Rejection and infection requiring hospitalization during the first year were associated with a persistently decreased CS probability. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we report differential conditional survival outcomes based on time, patient characteristics, and clinical events post-transplant, providing a dynamic assessment of survival. The survival probabilities will better inform patients and clinicians of future outcomes.

Extracorporeal photopheresis and its role in heart transplant rejection: prophylaxis and treatment.

Heart transplantation is the gold standard therapeutic option for select patients with end-stage heart failure. Unfortunately, successful long-term outcomes of heart transplantation can be hindered by immune-mediated rejection of the cardiac allograft, specifically acute cellular rejection, antibody-mediated rejection, and cardiac allograft vasculopathy. Extracorporeal photopheresis is a cellular immunotherapy that involves the collection and treatment of white blood cells contained in the buffy coat with a photoactive psoralen compound, 8-methoxy psoralen, and subsequent irradiation with ultraviolet A light. This process is thought to cause DNA and RNA crosslinking, ultimately leading to cell destruction. The true mechanism of therapeutic action remains unknown. In the last three decades, extracorporeal photopheresis has shown promising results and is indicated for a variety of conditions. The American Society for Apheresis currently recommends the use of extracorporeal photopheresis for the treatment of cutaneous T-cell lymphoma, scleroderma, psoriasis, pemphigus vulgaris, atopic dermatitis, graft-versus-host disease, Crohn's disease, nephrogenic systemic fibrosis, and solid organ rejection in heart, lung, and liver transplantation. In this review, we aim to explore the proposed effects of extracorporeal photopheresis and to summarize published data on its use as a prophylactic and therapy in heart transplant rejection.

Outcomes of COVID-19 in solid organ transplant recipients: A matched cohort study.

Whether solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients are at increased risk of poor outcomes due to COVID-19 in comparison to the general population remains uncertain. In this study, we compared outcomes of SOT recipients and non-SOT patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in a propensity score matched analysis based on age, race, ethnicity, BMI, diabetes, and hypertension. After propensity matching, 117 SOT recipients and 350 non-SOT patients were evaluated. The median age of SOT recipients was 61 years, with a median time from transplant of 5.68 years. The most common transplanted organs were kidney (48%), followed by lung (21%), heart (19%), and liver (10%). Overall, SOT recipients were more likely to receive COVID-19 specific therapies and to require ICU admission. However, mortality (23.08% in SOT recipients vs. 23.14% in controls, P = .21) and highest level of supplemental oxygen (P = .32) required during hospitalization did not significantly differ between groups. In this propensity matched cohort study, SOT recipients hospitalized with COVID-19 had similar overall outcomes as non-SOT recipients, suggesting that chronic immunosuppression may not be an independent risk factor for poor outcomes in COVID-19.

Impact of Bridge to Transplantation With Continuous-Flow Left Ventricular Assist Devices on Posttransplantation Mortality.

BACKGROUND: Bridge to transplantation (BTT) with left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) is a mainstay of therapy for heart failure in patients awaiting heart transplantation (HT). Criteria for HT listing do not differ between patients medically managed and those mechanically bridged to HT. The objectives of the present study were to evaluate the impact of BTT with LVAD on posttransplantation survival, to describe differences in causes of 1-year mortality in medically and mechanically bridged patients, and to evaluate differences in risk factors for 1-year mortality between those with and those without LVAD at the time of HT. METHODS: Using the United Network of Organ Sharing database, we identified 5486 adult, single-organ HT recipients transplanted between 2008 and 2015. Patients were propensity matched for likelihood of LVAD at the time of HT. Kaplan-Meier survival estimates were used to assess the impact of BTT on 1- and 5-year mortality. Logistic regression analysis was used to evaluate the odds ratio of 1-year mortality for patients BTT with LVAD compared with those with medical management across clinically significant variables at various thresholds. RESULTS: Early mortality was higher in mechanically bridged patients: 9.5% versus 7.2% mortality at 1 year (P<0.001). BTT patients incurred an increased risk of 1-year mortality with an estimated glomerular filtration rate of 40 to 60 mL·min-1·1.73 m-2 (odds ratio, 1.69; P=0.003) and <40 mL·min-1·1.73 m-2 (odds ratio, 2.16; P=0.005). A similar trend was seen in patients with a body mass index of 25 to 30 kg/m2 (odds ratio, 1.88; P=0.024) and >30 kg/m2 (odds ratio, 2.11; P<0.001). When patients were stratified by BTT status and the presence of risk factors, including age >60 years, estimated glomerular filtration rate <40 mL·min-1·1.73 m-2, and body mass index >30 kg/m2, there were significant differences in 1-year mortality between medium- and high-risk medically and mechanically bridged patients, with 1-year mortality in high-risk BTT patients at 17.6% compared with 10.4% in high-risk medically managed patients. CONCLUSIONS: Bridge to HT with LVAD, although necessary because of organ scarcity and capable of improving wait list survival, confers a significantly higher risk of early posttransplantation mortality. Patients bridged with mechanical support may require more careful consideration for transplant eligibility after LVAD placement.

Profiling non-HLA antibody responses in antibody-mediated rejection following heart transplantation.

Antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) driven by the development of donor-specific antibodies (DSA) directed against mismatched donor human leukocyte antigen (HLA) is a major risk factor for graft loss in cardiac transplantation. Recently, the relevance of non-HLA antibodies has become more prominent as AMR can be diagnosed in the absence of circulating DSA. Here, we assessed a single-center cohort of 64 orthotopic heart transplant recipients transplanted between 1994 and 2014. Serum collected from patients with ≥ pAMR1 (n = 43) and non-AMR (n = 21) were tested for reactivity against a panel of 44 non-HLA autoantigens. The AMR group had a significantly greater percentage of patients with elevated reactivity to autoantigens compared to non-AMR (P = .002) and healthy controls (n = 94, P < .0001). DSA-positive AMR patients exhibited greater reactivity to autoantigens compared to DSA-negative (P < .0001) and AMR patients with DSA and PRA > 10% were identified as the subgroup with significantly elevated responses. Reactivity to 4 antigens, vimentin, beta-tubulin, lamin A/C, and apolipoprotein L2, was significantly different between AMR and non-AMR patients. Moreover, increased reactivity to these antigens was associated with graft failure. These results suggest that antibodies to non-HLA are associated with DSA-positive AMR although their specific role in mediating allograft injury is not yet understood.

Tocilizumab for severe COVID-19 in solid organ transplant recipients: a matched cohort study.

The safety and efficacy of tocilizumab for the treatment of severe respiratory symptoms due to COVID-19 remain uncertain, in particular among solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients. Thus, we evaluated the clinical characteristics and outcomes of 29 hospitalized SOT recipients who received tocilizumab for severe COVID-19, compared to a matched control group who did not. Among a total of 117 total SOT recipients hospitalized with COVID-19, 29 (24.8%) received tocilizumab. The 90-day mortality was significantly higher among patients who received tocilizumab (41%) compared to those who did not (20%, P = .03). When compared to control patients matched by age, hypertension, chronic kidney disease, and administration of high dose corticosteroids, there was no significant difference in mortality (41% vs 28%, P = .27), hospital discharge (52% vs 72%, P = .26), or secondary infections (34% vs 24%, P = .55). Among patients who received tocilizumab, there was also no difference in mortality based on the level of oxygen support (intubated vs not intubated) at the time of tocilizumab initiation. In this matched cohort study, tocilizumab appeared to be safe but was not associated with decreased 90-day mortality. Larger randomized studies are needed to identify whether there are subsets of SOT recipients who may benefit from tocilizumab for treatment of COVID-19.

COVID-19 in solid organ transplant recipients: Initial report from the US epicenter.

Solid organ transplant recipients may be at a high risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection and poor associated outcomes. We herein report our initial experience with solid organ transplant recipients with SARS-CoV-2 infection at two centers during the first 3 weeks of the outbreak in New York City. Baseline characteristics, clinical presentation, antiviral and immunosuppressive management were compared between patients with mild/moderate and severe disease (defined as ICU admission, intubation or death). Ninety patients were analyzed with a median age of 57 years. Forty-six were kidney recipients, 17 lung, 13 liver, 9 heart, and 5 dual-organ transplants. The most common presenting symptoms were fever (70%), cough (59%), and dyspnea (43%). Twenty-two (24%) had mild, 41 (46%) moderate, and 27 (30%) severe disease. Among the 68 hospitalized patients, 12% required non-rebreather and 35% required intubation. 91% received hydroxychloroquine, 66% azithromycin, 3% remdesivir, 21% tocilizumab, and 24% bolus steroids. Sixteen patients died (18% overall, 24% of hospitalized, 52% of ICU) and 37 (54%) were discharged. In this initial cohort, transplant recipients with COVID-19 appear to have more severe outcomes, although testing limitations likely led to undercounting of mild/asymptomatic cases. As this outbreak unfolds, COVID-19 has the potential to severely impact solid organ transplant recipients.

Considerations for Referral: What Happens to Patients After Being Turned Down for Left Ventricular Assist Device Therapy.

BACKGROUND: Left ventricular assist device (LVAD) therapy has revolutionized the treatment options for patients with advanced heart failure. Patient selection is essential for obtaining successful results. However, few data exist concerning the outcomes of patients evaluated for LVAD therapy but subsequently rejected or deferred. METHODS AND RESULTS: This is a retrospective review of all patients referred for LVAD therapy at our institution between January 2009 and December 2016. Baseline demographics and Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support profiles were collected, and reasons for rejection or deferral for LVAD placement were investigated. A total of 669 patients were referred for LVAD therapy, and 228 patients (34%) were turned down. The yearly acceptance rate ranged between 57% and 75%. The average age of the turned-down cohort was 60.8 ± 12.5 years; 83% were men. Reasons for rejection included: patient being too sick (34%); psychosocial concerns (25%); patient declined (16%); decision was deferred for medical optimization (15%); or patient being too well (10%). The percentage of patients who were rejected due to psychosocial concerns has increased over time (P = 0.02), whereas the rate of deferral for medical optimization has remained stable (P = 0.10). One-year survival after initial LVAD consultation was 42% in those who were too sick, 64% in those with psychosocial concerns, 68% in patients who declined, 86% in those deferred for medical optimization; and 100% in those too well (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: One-year survival is reduced among patients who were initially turned down for LVAD therapy, except for those in whom this decision was deferred for medical optimization or because the patient was too well. Psychosocial concerns have become a significant barrier to LVAD therapy.

Comparing outcomes for infiltrative and restrictive cardiomyopathies under the new heart transplant allocation system.

The new heart transplantation (HT) allocation policy was introduced on 10/18/2018. Using the UNOS registry, we examined early outcomes following HT for restrictive cardiomyopathy, hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, cardiac sarcoidosis, or cardiac amyloidosis compared to the old system. Those listed who had an event (transplant, death, or waitlist removal) prior to 10/17/2018 were in Era 1, and those listed on or after 10/18/2018 were in Era 2. The primary endpoint was death on the waitlist or delisting due to clinical deterioration. A total of 1232 HT candidates were included, 855 (69.4%) in Era 1 and 377 (30.6%) in Era 2. In Era 2, there was a significant increase in the use of temporary mechanical circulatory support and a reduction in the primary endpoint, (20.9 events per 100 PY (Era 1) vs. 18.6 events per 100 PY (Era 2), OR 1.98, p = .005). Median waitlist time decreased (91 vs. 58 days, p < .001), and transplantation rate increased (119.0 to 204.7 transplants/100 PY for Era 1 vs Era 2). Under the new policy, there has been a decrease in waitlist time and waitlist mortality/delisting due to clinical deterioration, and an increase in transplantation rates for patients with infiltrative, hypertrophic, and restrictive cardiomyopathies without any effect on post-transplant 6-month survival.

United network for organ sharing outcomes after heart transplantation for al compared to ATTR cardiac amyloidosis.

Light-chain (AL) cardiac amyloidosis (CA) has a worse prognosis than transthyretin (ATTR) CA. In this single-center study, we compared post-heart transplant (OHT, orthotopic heart transplantation) survival for AL and ATTR amyloidosis, hypothesizing that these differences would persist post-OHT. Thirty-nine patients with CA (AL, n = 18; ATTR, n = 21) and 1023 non-amyloidosis subjects undergoing OHT were included. Cox proportional hazards modeling was used to evaluate the impact of amyloid subtype and era (early era: from 2001 to 2007; late era: from 2008 to 2018) on survival post-OHT. Survival for non-amyloid patients was greater than ATTR (P = .034) and AL (P < .001) patients in the early era. One, 3-, and 5-year survival rates were higher for ATTR patients than AL patients in the early era (100% vs 75%, 67% vs 50%, and 67% vs 33%, respectively, for ATTR and AL patients). Survival in the non-amyloid cohort was 87% at 1 year, 81% at 3 years, and 76% at 5 years post-OHT. In the late era, AL and ATTR patients had unadjusted 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year survival rates of 100%, which was comparable to non-amyloid patients (90% vs 84% vs 81%). Overall, these findings demonstrate that in the current era, differences in post-OHT survival for AL compared to ATTR are diminishing; OHT outcomes for selected patients with CA do not differ from non-amyloidosis patients.

Minimally invasive central venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for long-term ambulatory support as a bridge to heart-lung transplant.

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is becoming a key tool for bridge to heart, lung, or heart-lung transplantation, and ambulatory ECMO support offers many advantages to prepare the patients. We here present a case of successful en bloc heart and lung transplantation after long-term ambulatory support with a minimally invasive central venoarterial ECMO approach as bridge to transplant.

Outcomes of mechanical support for cardiogenic shock associated with late cardiac allograft failure.

BACKGROUND: Late graft failure (LGF) is an unresolved issue after orthotopic heart transplant (OHT). In this study, we report characteristics and outcomes of severe LGF requiring mechanical circulatory support (MCS). METHODS: All patients undergoing OHT from 2000 to 2018 at our center were reviewed. Patients re-admitted to the hospital for late graft failure (>3 months after initial discharge) and developing cardiogenic shock requiring MCS were identified. Outcomes and mortality were evaluated. RESULTS: Twenty-six patients were identified. Median age was 37.3 years (interquartile range: 28.2-47.6) and 69% were male. Median time from initial transplant to MCS was 2.9 years. Etiology of graft failure was rejection in 19 patients (73%), transplant coronary artery disease (tCAD) in 3 (12%), with mixed tCAD or rejection in 4 (15%).

Incidence and risk factors of groin lymphocele formation after venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in cardiogenic shock patients.

OBJECTIVE: Venous-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) is a well-established therapy for refractory cardiopulmonary failure. Femoral cannulation offers a quick and effective means of providing circulatory support but is not without complication. Inflammation or lymphatic disruption at the site of cannulation can cause the formation of lymphoceles, leading to the patient's discomfort and possibly necessitating intervention. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the incidence of in-hospital lymphocele formation in VA-ECMO patients and to identify predictors for their development. METHODS: We conducted a single-center retrospective review of 192 patients who underwent femoral VA-ECMO insertion and subsequent decannulation from March 2007 to August 2016 for cardiogenic shock. Baseline demographics, risk factors, and cannulation strategies were examined. Groin lymphocele formation was assessed as the primary outcome. RESULTS: Median age was 58 years (interquartile range, 48-67 years) with a median duration of support of 4 days (interquartile range, 2-6 days). Lymphocele formation was identified in 31 patients (16%). Patients who developed lymphoceles were more likely to have post-heart transplantation primary graft dysfunction (PGD) as an indication for ECMO support compared with those who did not (54.2% vs 8%; P < .001). ECMO duration was similar between groups, but lymphocele patients were more likely to have undergone femoral cutdown procedures (68% vs 42%; P = .010). Compared with those PGD patients who did not develop lymphoceles, PGD lymphocele patients had higher rates of diabetes mellitus preoperatively (62% vs 8%; P = .006). Thirteen (42%) patients required surgical incision and drainage, and 4 of these patients (31%) required repeated surgical intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Lymphocele formation is relatively common after femoral VA-ECMO. There was a significantly higher incidence of lymphocele formation in diabetic patients requiring support for PGD after heart transplantation.