Hypothermic oxygenated perfusion of the donor heart in heart transplantation: the short-term outcome from a randomised, controlled, open-label, multicentre clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Static cold storage (SCS) remains the gold standard for preserving donor hearts before transplantation but is associated with ischaemia, anaerobic metabolism, and organ injuries, leading to patient morbidity and mortality. We aimed to evaluate whether continuous, hypothermic oxygenated machine perfusion (HOPE) of the donor heart is safe and superior compared with SCS. METHODS: We performed a multinational, multicentre, randomised, controlled, open-label clinical trial with a superiority design at 15 transplant centres across eight European countries. Adult candidates for heart transplantation were eligible and randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio. Donor inclusion criteria were age 18-70 years with no previous sternotomy and donation after brain death. In the treatment group, the preservation protocol involved the use of a portable machine perfusion system ensuring HOPE of the resting donor heart. The donor hearts in the control group underwent ischaemic SCS according to standard practices. The primary outcome was time to first event of a composite of either cardiac-related death, moderate or severe primary graft dysfunction (PGD) of the left ventricle, PGD of the right ventricle, acute cellular rejection at least grade 2R, or graft failure (with use of mechanical circulatory support or re-transplantation) within 30 days after transplantation. We included all patients who were randomly assigned, fulfilled inclusion and exclusion criteria, and received a transplant in the primary analysis and all patients who were randomly assigned and received a transplant in the safety analyses. This trial was registered with ClicalTrials.gov (NCT03991923) and is ongoing. FINDINGS: A total of 229 patients were enrolled between Nov 25, 2020, and May 19, 2023. The primary analysis population included 204 patients who received a transplant. There were no patients who received a transplant lost to follow-up. All 100 donor hearts preserved with HOPE were transplantable after perfusion. The primary endpoint was registered in 19 (19%) of 101 patients in the HOPE group and 31 (30%) of 103 patients in the SCS group, corresponding to a risk reduction of 44% (hazard ratio 0·56; 95% CI 0·32-0·99; log-rank test p=0·059). PGD was the primary outcome event in 11 (11%) patients in the HOPE group and 29 (28%) in the SCS group (risk ratio 0·39; 95% CI 0·20-0·73). In the HOPE group, 63 (65%) patients had a reported serious adverse event (158 events) versus 87 (70%; 222 events) in the SCS group. Major adverse cardiac transplant events were reported in 18 (18%) and 33 (32%) patients in the HOPE and SCS group (risk ratio 0·56; 95% CI 0·34-0·92). INTERPRETATION: Although there was not a significant difference in the primary endpoint, the 44% risk reduction associated with HOPE was suggested to be a clinically meaningful benefit. Post-transplant complications, measured as major adverse cardiac transplant events, were reduced. Analysis of secondary outcomes suggested that HOPE was beneficial in reducing primary graft dysfunction. HOPE in donor heart preservation addresses the existing challenges associated with graft preservation and the increasing complexity of donors and heart transplantation recipients. Future investigation will help to further elucidate the benefit of HOPE. FUNDING: XVIVO Perfusion.

British societies guideline on the management of emergencies in implantable left ventricular assist device recipients in transplant centres.

An implantable left ventricular assist device (LVAD) is indicated as a bridge to transplantation or recovery in the United Kingdom (UK). The mechanism of action of the LVAD results in a unique state of haemodynamic stability with diminished arterial pulsatility. The clinical assessment of an LVAD recipient can be challenging because non-invasive blood pressure, pulse and oxygen saturation measurements may be hard to obtain. As a result of this unusual situation and complex interplay between the device and the native circulation, resuscitation of LVAD recipients requires bespoke guidelines. Through collaboration with key UK stakeholders, we assessed the current evidence base and developed guidelines for the recognition of clinical deterioration, inadequate circulation and time-critical interventions. Such guidelines, intended for use in transplant centres, are designed to be deployed by those providing immediate care of LVAD patients under conditions of precipitous clinical deterioration. In summary, the Joint British Societies and Transplant Centres LVAD Working Group present the UK guideline on management of emergencies in implantable LVAD recipients for use in advanced heart failure centres. These recommendations have been made with a UK resuscitation focus but are widely applicable to professionals regularly managing patients with implantable LVADs.