Outcomes of Heart Transplant Using High Donor Sequence Number Offers.

INTRODUCTION: Higher donor sequence numbers (DSNs) might spark provider concern about poor donor quality. We evaluated characteristics of high-DSN offers used for transplant and compared outcomes of high- and low-DSN transplants. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Adult isolated heart transplants between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2022, were identified from the organ procurement and transplantation network database and stratified into high (≥42) and low (<42) DSN. Postoperative outcomes, including predischarge complications, hospital length of stay, and survival at 1 and 3 y, were evaluated using multivariable regressions. RESULTS: A total of 21,217 recipients met the inclusion criteria, with 2131 (10.0%) classified as high-DSN. Donor factors associated with greater odds of high-DSN at acceptance included older age, higher creatinine, diabetes, hypertension, and lower left ventricular ejection fraction. Recipients accepting high-DSN offers were older and more likely to be female, of blood type O, and have lower status at transplant. High- and low-DSN transplants had similar likelihood of stroke (3.2% versus 3.5%; P = 0.97), dialysis (12.3% versus 13.5%; P = 0.12), pacemaker implant (2.3% versus 2.1%; P = 0.64), had similar lengths of stay (16 [12-24] versus 16 [12-25] days, P = 0.38), and survival at 1 (91.6% versus 91.6%; aHR 0.85 [0.72-1.02], P = 0.08) and 3 y (84.2% versus 85.1%; aHR 0.91 [0.79-1.05], P = 0.21) post-transplant. CONCLUSIONS: High-DSN (≥42) was not an independent risk factor for post-transplant mortality and should not be the sole deterrent to acceptance. Accepting high-DSN organs may increase access to transplantation for lower-status candidates.

The impact of a statewide payment reform on transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) utilization and readmissions.

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is an increasingly used but relatively expensive procedure with substantial associated readmission rates. It is unknown how cost-constrictive payment reform measures, such as Maryland's All Payer Model, impact TAVR utilization given its relative expense. This study investigated the impact of Maryland's All Payer Model on TAVR utilization and readmissions among Maryland Medicare beneficiaries. METHODS: This was a quasi-experimental investigation of Maryland Medicare patients undergoing TAVR between 2012 and 2018. New Jersey data were used for comparison. Longitudinal interrupted time series analyses were used to study TAVR utilization and difference-in-differences analyses were used to investigate post-TAVR readmissions. RESULTS: During the first year of payment reform (2014), TAVR utilization among Maryland Medicare beneficiaries dropped by 8% (95% confidence interval [CI]: -9.2% to -7.1%; p < 0.001), with no concomitant change in TAVR utilization in New Jersey (0.2%, 95% CI: 0%-1%, p = 0.09). Longitudinally, however, the All Payer Model did not impact TAVR utilization in Maryland compared to New Jersey. Difference-in-differences analyses demonstrated that implementation of the All Payer Model was not associated with significantly greater declines in 30-day post-TAVR readmissions in Maryland versus New Jersey (-2.1%; 95% CI: -5.2% to 0.9%; p =0.1). CONCLUSIONS: Maryland's All Payer Model resulted in an immediate decline in TAVR utilization, likely a result of hospitals adjusting to global budgeting. However, beyond this transition period, this cost-constrictive reform measure did not limit Maryland TAVR utilization. In addition, the All Payer Model did not reduce post-TAVR 30-day readmissions. These findings may help inform expansion of globally budgeted healthcare payment structures.

Current status and future potential of ex vivo lung perfusion in clinical lung transplantation.

Lung transplantation is accepted as a well-established and effective treatment for patients with end-stage lung disease. While the number of candidates added to the waitlist continues to rise, the number of transplants performed remains limited by the number of suitable organ donors. Ex vivo lung perfusion (EVLP) emerged as a method of addressing the organ shortage by allowing the evaluation and potential reconditioning of marginal donor lungs or minimizing risks of prolonged ischemic time due to logistical challenges. The currently available FDA-approved EVLP systems have demonstrated excellent outcomes in clinical trials, and retrospective studies have demonstrated similar post-transplant survival between recipients who received marginal donor lungs perfused using EVLP and recipients who received standard criteria lungs stored using conventional methods. Despite this, widespread utilization has plateaued in the last few years, likely due to the significant costs associated with initiating EVLP programs. Centralized, dedicated EVLP perfusion centers are currently being investigated as a potential method of further expanding utilization of this technology. In the preclinical setting, potential applications of EVLP that are currently being studied include prolongation of organ preservation, reconditioning of unsuitable lungs, and further enhancement of already suitable lungs. As adoption of EVLP technology becomes more widespread, we may begin to see future implementation of these potential applications into the clinical setting.

Costs and Readmissions Associated with Type A Aortic Dissections at High- and Low-Volume Centers.

BACKGROUND: Costs and readmissions associated with type A aortic dissection repairs are not well understood. We investigated statewide readmissions, costs, and outcomes associated with the surgical management of type A aortic dissection repairs at low- and high-volume centers. METHODS: We identified all adult type A aortic dissection patients who underwent operative repair in the Maryland Health Services Cost Review Commission's database (2012-2020). Hospitals were stratified into high- (top quartile of total repairs) or low-volume centers. RESULTS: Of the 249 patients included, 193 (77.5%) were treated at a high-volume center. Patients treated at high- and low-volume centers had no differences in age, sex, race, primary payer, or severity (all p > 0.5). High- compared to low-volume centers had a greater proportion of patients transferred in (71.5% vs. 17.9%, p < 0.001). High-volume centers also had longer lengths of stay (12 vs. 8 days, p < 0.001), similar inpatient mortality (13.0% vs. 16.1%, p = 0.6), and similar proportion of patients readmitted (54.9% vs. 51.8%, p = 0.7). High-volume centers had greater index admission costs ($114,859 vs. $72,090, p < 0.001) and similar readmission costs ($48,367 vs. $42,204, p = 0.5). At high-volume centers, transferred patients compared to direct admissions had greater severity of illness (p = 0.05), similar mortality (p = 0.53), and greater lengths of stay (p = 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: High-volume centers had a greater number of patients transferred from other institutions compared to low-volume centers. High-volume centers were associated with increased index admission resource utilization, with transfer patients having higher illness severity and greater resource utilization, yet similar mortality, compared to direct admission patients.

Massive left atrial thrombus evades multimodality imaging as a myxoma in a bicaval heart transplant recipient.

Intracardiac masses are an extremely rare and poorly described complication following a bicaval heart transplantation. We describe the case of an asymptomatic 62-year-old male with a large left atrial mass found incidentally on transthoracic echocardiography 6 years post-transplant. A battery of additional imaging tests was ordered including transesophageal echocardiography, 18 F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography, and T1 and T2 magnetic resonance imaging. Although imaging biomarkers were generally nonspecific, the mass was most consistent with a cardiac myxoma. However, intraoperative findings confirmed by pathology revealed a massive organizing thrombus. The patient had an uneventful recovery after surgical removal of the mass. Our case highlights a very rare phenomenon in heart transplant recipients which remains a unique diagnostic challenge even with current advances in imaging.

Reoperative approach after extra-anatomic ascending-to-descending aortic bypass graft.

BACKGROUND: Extra-anatomic ascending-to-descending aortic bypass grafts have historically been utilized as a safe and effective solution for repairs of complex coarctation of the aorta. However, reports on reoperation in these patients remain rare. We present a case of an aortic valve replacement and coronary artery bypass grafting in a patient with an extra-anatomic ascending-to-descending aortic bypass graft. CASE PRESENTATION: The patient is a 59-year-old male with a complex aortic history, including repair of aortic coarctation with an ascending-to-descending aortic bypass graft 13 years prior, was admitted to the hospital for shortness of breath and chest pain that had developed over the past year. On further workup, he was found to have severe bileaflet aortic valve stenosis, non-ST elevation myocardial infarction, and moderate coronary artery disease. He underwent surgical aortic valve replacement and coronary artery bypass grafting. Given his unique anatomy, cardiopulmonary bypass approach involved separate cannulation of the right axillary and left common femoral arteries with cross-clamp of both the aorta and the extra-anatomic graft. Using this approach, the redo operation was successfully performed. CONCLUSIONS: Reports on reoperation after ascending-to-descending aortic bypass grafting are rare. We describe our approach to cardiopulmonary bypass and reoperation in a patient with an extra-anatomic ascending-to-descending aortic bypass graft.

Unusual presentation and delayed diagnosis of cardiac angiosarcoma.

BACKGROUND: Primary cardiac angiosarcomas are very rare and present aggressively with high rates of metastasis. Given the poor prognosis, particularly once disease has spread, early diagnosis and multidisciplinary treatment is essential. CASE PRESENTATION: We present the case of a 46-year-old male who presented with chest pain, intermittent fevers, and dyspnea. Workup with computed tomography scan and transesophageal echocardiography demonstrated a right atrial pseudoaneurysm. Given the concern for rupture, the patient was taken to the operating room, where resection of the pseudoaneurysm and repair using a bovine pericardial patch was performed. Histopathology report initially demonstrated perivascular lymphocyte infiltrate. Six weeks later, the patient represented with chest pain and new word finding difficulty. Workup revealed multiple solid lung, pericardial, brain, and bone nodules. Eventual biopsy of a cardiophrenic nodule demonstrated angiosarcoma, and rereview of the original pathology slides confirmed the diagnosis of primary cardiac angiosarcoma. CONCLUSIONS: Primary cardiac angiosarcomas are often misdiagnosed given the rarity of these tumors, but early diagnosis and initiation of treatment is essential. The unique presentation of our case demonstrates that clinical suspicion for cardiac angiosarcoma should be maintained for spontaneous pseudoaneurysm originating from the right atrium.

Kidney Donation After Circulatory Death Using Thoracoabdominal Normothermic Regional Perfusion: The Largest Report of the United States Experience.

BACKGROUND: Thoracoabdominal normothermic regional perfusion (TA-NRP) has been increasingly used for donation after circulatory death (DCD) procurements in the United States. We present the largest report of outcomes of kidney transplants performed using DCD donor grafts perfused with TA-NRP. METHODS: Adult DCD kidney transplants between 2020 and 2022 in the United Network for Organ Sharing database were included. Donors with ≥50 min between asystole and aortic cross-clamp time in which the heart was also transplanted were considered TA-NRP donors. All other donors were considered direct recovery donors. Multivariable regressions were used to assess delayed graft function, as well as posttransplant survival and all-cause graft failure at 30, 90, and 180 d. A propensity-matched analysis of cohorts matched on donor Kidney Donor Profile Index was performed. RESULTS: Of the 16 140 total DCD kidney transplants performed during the study period, 306 (1.9%) used TA-NRP. TA-NRP donors were younger ( P < 0.001) and had lower Kidney Donor Profile Index ( P < 0.001) compared with direct recovery donors. Recipients receiving grafts recovered using TA-NRP were younger ( P < 0.001) and more likely to be blood group O ( P < 0.001). Transplants using TA-NRP had lower likelihood of delayed graft function (adjusted odds ratio 0.22 [95% confidence interval, 0.15-0.31], P < 0.001) but similar 180-d survival ( P = 0.8) and all-cause graft failure ( P = 0.3) as transplants using direct recovery grafts. These inferences were unchanged on propensity-matched analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Our results demonstrate that kidney transplants using TA-NRP DCD allografts have positive short-term mortality and graft survival outcomes, with significantly decreased rates of delayed graft function compared with direct recovery DCD grafts.

Utilization and outcomes of expanded criteria donors in adults with congenital heart disease.

BACKGROUND: Use of donation after circulatory death (DCD) and hepatitis C virus (HCV) positive donors in heart transplantation have increased the donor pool. Given poor waitlist outcomes in the adult congenital heart disease (ACHD) population, we investigated waitlist outcomes associated with willingness to consider DCD and HCV+ offers and post-transplant outcomes following HCV+ and DCD transplantation for these candidates. METHODS: Using the United Network for Organ Sharing database, we identified adult ACHD candidates and recipients listed or transplanted, respectively, between 01/01/2016 and 09/30/2023 for the HCV analysis and between 12/01/2019 and 09/30/2023 for the DCD analysis. Among candidates, we compared the cumulative incidence of transplant, with waitlist death/deterioration as a competing risk, by willingness to consider HCV+ and DCD offers. Among recipients of HCV+ (vs HCV-) and DCD (vs brain death [DBD]) transplants, we compared perioperative outcomes and post-transplant survival. RESULTS: Of 1,436 ACHD candidates from 01/01/2016 to 09/30/2023, 37.0% were willing to consider HCV+ heart offers. Of 886 ACHD candidates from 12/01/2019 to 09/30/2023, 15.5% were willing to consider DCD offers. On adjusted analysis, willingness to consider HCV+ offers was associated with 84% increased likelihood of transplant, and willingness to consider DCD offers was associated with 56% increased likelihood of transplant. Of 904 transplants between 01/01/2016 and 09/30/2023, 6.4% utilized HCV+ donors, and of 540 transplants between 12/01/2019 and 09/30/2023, 6.9% utilized DCD donors. Recipients of HCV+ (vs HCV-) and DCD (vs DBD) heart transplants had similar likelihood of perioperative outcomes and 1-year survival. CONCLUSIONS: ACHD candidates who were willing to consider HCV+ and DCD offers were more likely to be transplanted and had similar post-transplant outcomes compared to recipients of HCV- and DBD organs.

Changes in Donor Utilization and Outcomes for Patients Bridged With Durable Left Ventricular Assist Device.

We studied the impact of the 2018 heart allocation policy change on donor characteristics and posttransplant outcomes of left ventricular assist device (LVAD)-bridged heart transplant (HT) recipients. Left ventricular assist device-bridged adult HT recipients from October 2014 to October 2022 in the United Network for Organ Sharing database were categorized into old allocation policy (OAP) and new allocation policy (NAP) cohorts. Baseline characteristics, posttransplant outcomes, and subgroup analyses of unstable and stable LVAD-bridged recipients were assessed. The study included 7,384 HT recipients; 4,345 (58.8%) were transplanted in the OAP era and 3,039 (41.2%) in the NAP era. Old allocation policy recipients were most frequently status 1A at transplantation (71.1%), whereas NAP recipients were most frequently status 3 (40.0%), and status 4 (31.9%). Median donor sequence number (DSN) was higher in the NAP versus OAP era (9 vs. 3, p < 0.001). On multivariable analysis, NAP recipients had 20% higher 1 year mortality compared to OAP (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] = 1.20 [95% confidence interval {CI}: 1.04-1.40], p = 0.01). Status 1 or 2 recipients had 28% higher 1 year mortality compared to status 1A (aHR = 1.28 [95% CI: 1.01-1.63], p = 0.04). Status 1 and 2 LVAD-supported recipients had higher mortality following the 2018 allocation change, indicating the need for closer surveillance of LVAD-bridged patients who may decompensate on the waitlist.

Outcomes following concomitant multiorgan heart transplantation from circulatory death donors: The United States experience.

BACKGROUND: Donation after circulatory death (DCD) has reemerged as a method of expanding the donor heart pool. Given the high waitlist mortality of multiorgan heart candidates, we evaluated waitlist outcomes associated with willingness to consider DCD offers and post-transplant outcomes following DCD transplant for these candidates. METHODS: We identified adult multiorgan heart candidates and recipients between January 1, 2020 and March 31, 2023 nationally. Among candidates that met inclusion criteria, we compared the cumulative incidence of transplant, with waitlist death/deterioration as a competing risk, by willingness to consider DCD offers. Among recipients of DCD versus brain death (DBD) transplants, we compared perioperative outcomes and post-transplant survival. RESULTS: Of 1,802 heart-kidney, 266 heart-liver, and 440 heart-lung candidates, 15.8%, 12.4%, and 31.1%, respectively, were willing to consider DCD offers. On adjusted analysis, willingness to consider DCD offers was associated with higher likelihood of transplant for all multiorgan heart candidates and decreased likelihood of waitlist deterioration for heart-lung candidates. Of 1,100 heart-kidney, 173 heart-liver, and 159 heart-lung recipients, 5.4%, 2.3%, and 2.5%, respectively, received DCD organs. Recipients of DCD and DBD heart-kidney transplants had a similar likelihood of perioperative outcomes and 1-year survival. All other DCD multiorgan heart recipients have survived to the last follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Multiorgan heart candidates who were willing to consider DCD offers had favorable waitlist outcomes, and heart-kidney recipients of DCD transplants had similar post-transplant outcomes to recipients of DBD transplants. We recommend the use of DCD organs to increase the donor pool for these high-risk candidates.

For Your Consideration: Benefits of Listing as Willing to Consider Heart Offers from Donors with Hepatitis C.

OBJECTIVE: Despite excellent outcomes of heart transplants from donors with hepatitis C (HCV D+), many candidates are not listed to even consider HCV D+ offers. METHODS: Using the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients, we identified adult (≥18y) heart transplant candidates prevalent on the waitlist 2018-03/2023. We compared likelihood of waitlist mortality or heart transplant by candidate willingness to consider HCV D+ offers using competing risk regression. RESULTS: We identified 19,415 heart transplant candidates, 68.9% of whom were willing to consider HCV D+ offers. Heart candidates willing to consider HCV D+ offers had 37% lower risk of waitlist mortality (SHR 0.63, 95%CI 0.56-0.70, p<0.001) than candidates not willing to consider HCV D+ offers, after adjustment for covariates and center-level clustering. Over the same period, heart transplant candidates willing to consider HCV D+ offers had 21% higher likelihood of receiving a transplant (SHR 1.21, 95%CI 1.7-1.26, p<0.001). As a result, among candidates willing to consider HCV D+ offers, 74.9% received a transplant and 6.1% died/deteriorated after three years, versus 68.3% and 9.1% of candidates not willing to consider HCV D+ offers. Lower waitlist mortality was also observed on subgroup analyses of candidates on temporary and durable mechanical circulatory support. CONCLUSION: Willingness to consider HCV D+ heart offers was associated with a 37% lower risk of waitlist mortality and a 21% higher likelihood of receiving a transplant. We urge providers encourage candidates to list as willing to consider offers from donors with hepatitis C to optimize their waitlist outcomes and access to transplant.

National Incidence, Outcomes, and Management Strategies for Pre- and Post-Transplant Atrial Fibrillation in Heart Transplant Recipients.

Background: Among heart transplant candidates, atrial fibrillation (AF) is a common comorbidity; however, little is known about the impact of pre-transplant AF on incidence of post-transplant AF or other transplant outcomes. Methods: Adult heart transplant recipients transplanted from 07/01/2012 to 07/01/2021 with data available in both the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients and Symphony Health pharmacy databases were included. Recipients were categorized by presence of pre-transplant AF using prescription fill data. Perioperative outcomes and survival out to 5 years post-transplant were compared between those with and without pre-transplant AF. Results: Of the 11,789 heart transplant recipients, 2,477 (21.0%) had pre-transplant AF. Pre-transplant AF was associated with an increased likelihood of pre-discharge stroke (aOR 2.13 [95%CI: 1.07-4.26], p=0.03) and dialysis (aOR 1.45 [1.05-2.00], p=0.02), as well as of post-transplant AF at 6 months (aOR 2.42 [1.44-1.48], p=0.001) and 1 year (aOR 2.81 [1.72-4.56], p<0.001). Pre-transplant AF was associated with increased post-transplant mortality at 30 days (aHR 2.39 [1.29-4.44], p=0.006) and 1 year (aHR 1.46 [95% CI: 1.01-2.13], p=0.04), but similar mortality at 5 years (aHR 1.23 [0.96-1.58], p=0.11). Conclusion: Heart transplant recipients with pre-transplant AF had worse short-term outcomes and increased risk of developing post-transplant AF but comparable survival at 5 years post-transplant. Our findings emphasize the importance of increased monitoring for perioperative complications and highlight the long-term safety of heart transplantation in this population. What Is New?: Patients with atrial fibrillation who undergo heart transplantation have worse short term survival (30-days and 1-year) but similar long term survival (5-years) compared to recipients without pre-transplant atrial fibrillation.Pre-transplant atrial fibrillation increases the risk of clinically significant post-transplant atrial fibrillation and peri-operative stroke.Rate vs rhythm control pharmacotherapy for atrial fibrillation is not associated with differences in survival in heart transplant recipients with pre-transplant atrial fibrillation. What are the Clinical Implications?: Atrial fibrillation should not deter heart transplantation in appropriate candidates, though cardiovascular and stroke risk adjustment may be warranted.Use of amiodarone at doses ≤ 200 mg/day is not associated with reduced survival in heart transplant recipients with pre-transplant atrial fibrillation.

Special Considerations for Advanced Heart Failure Surgeries: Durable Left Ventricular Devices and Heart Transplantation.

Heart transplantation and durable left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) represent two definitive therapies for end-stage heart failure in the modern era. Despite technological advances, both treatment modalities continue to experience unique risks that impact surgical and perioperative decision-making. Here, we review special populations and factors that impact risk in LVAD and heart transplant surgery and examine critical decisions in the management of these patients. As both heart transplantation and the use of durable LVADs as destination therapy continue to increase, these considerations will be of increasing relevance in managing advanced heart failure and improving outcomes.

Debunking the July Effect in lung transplantation recipients.

Objective: The "July Effect" is a theory that the influx of trainees from July to September negatively impacts patient outcomes. We aimed to study this theoretical phenomenon in lung transplant recipients given the highly technical nature of thoracic procedures. Methods: Adult lung transplant hospitalizations were identified within the National Inpatient Sample (2005-2020). Recipients were categorized as academic Q1 (July to September) or Q2-Q4 (October to June). In-hospital mortality, operator-driven complications (pneumothorax, dehiscence including wound dehiscence, bronchial anastomosis, and others, and vocal cord/diaphragm paralysis, all 3 treated as a composite outcome), length of stay, and inflation-adjusted hospitalization charges were compared between both groups. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to assess the association between academic quarter and in-hospital mortality and operator-driven complications. The models were adjusted for recipient demographics and transplant characteristics. Subgroup analysis was performed between academic and nonacademic hospitals. Results: Of 30,788 lung transplants, 7838 occurred in Q1 and 22,950 occurred in Q2-Q4. Recipient demographic and clinical characteristics were similar between groups. Dehiscence (n = 922, 4% vs n = 236, 3%), post-transplant cardiac arrest (n = 532, 2% vs n = 113, 1%), and pulmonary embolism (n = 712, 3% vs n = 164, 2%) were more common in Q2-Q4 versus Q1 recipients (all P < .05). Other operator-driven complications, in-hospital mortality, and resource use were similar between groups (P > .05). These inferences remained unchanged in adjusted analyses and on subgroup analyses of academic versus nonacademic hospitals. Conclusions: The "July Effect" is not evident in US lung transplantation recipient outcomes during the transplant hospitalization. This suggests that current institutional monitoring systems for trainees across multiple specialties, including surgery, anesthesia, critical care, nursing, and others, are robust.

Uptake and 1-year outcomes of lung transplantation for COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE: End-stage lung disease from severe COVID-19 infection is an increasingly common indication for lung transplantation (LT), but there are limited data on outcomes. We evaluated 1-year COVID-19 LT outcomes. METHODS: We identified all adult US LT recipients January 2020 to October 2022 in the Scientific Registry for Transplant Recipients, using diagnosis codes to identify recipients transplanted for COVID-19. We used multivariable regression to compare in-hospital acute rejection, prolonged ventilator support, tracheostomy, dialysis, and 1-year mortality between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 recipients, adjusting for donor, recipient, and transplant characteristics. RESULTS: LT for COVID-19 increased from 0.8% to 10.7% of total LT volume during 2020 to 2021. The number of centers performing LT for COVID-19 increased from 12 to 50. Recipients transplanted for COVID-19 were younger; were more likely to be male and Hispanic; were more likely to be on a ventilator, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support, and dialysis pre-LT; were more likely to receive bilateral LT; and had higher lung allocation score and shorter waitlist time than other recipients (all P values < .001). COVID-19 LT had higher risk of prolonged ventilator support (adjusted odds ratio, 2.28; P < .001), tracheostomy (adjusted odds ratio 5.3; P < .001), and longer length of stay (median, 27 vs 19 days; P < .001). Risk of in-hospital acute rejection (adjusted odds ratio, 0.99; P = .95) and 1-year mortality (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.73; P = .12) were similar for COVID-19 LTs and LTs for other indications, even accounting for center-level differences. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 LT is associated with higher risk of immediate postoperative complications but similar risk of 1-year mortality despite more severe pre-LT illness. These encouraging results support the ongoing use of LT for COVID-19-related lung disease.

The effect of allograft ischemic time on outcomes following bilateral, single, and reoperative lung transplantation.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether allograft ischemic times affect outcomes following bilateral, single, and redo lung transplantation. METHODS: A nationwide cohort of lung transplant recipients from 2005 through 2020 was examined using the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network registry. The effects of standard (<6 hours) and extended (≥6 hours) ischemic times on outcomes following primary bilateral (n = 19,624), primary single (n = 688), redo bilateral (n = 8461), and redo single (n = 449) lung transplantation were analyzed. A priori subgroup analysis was performed in the primary and redo bilateral-lung transplant cohorts by further stratifying the extended ischemic time group into mild (≥6 and <8 hours), moderate (≥8 and <10 hours), and long (≥10 hours) subgroups. Primary outcomes included 30-day mortality, 1-year mortality, intubation at 72 hours' posttransplant, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) support at 72 hours' posttransplant, and a composite variable of intubation or ECMO at 72 hours' posttransplant. Secondary outcomes included acute rejection, postoperative dialysis, and hospital length of stay. RESULTS: Recipients of allografts with ischemic times ≥6 hours experienced increased 30-day and 1-year mortality following primary bilateral-lung transplantation, but increased mortality was not observed following primary single, redo bilateral, or redo single-lung transplants. Extended ischemic times correlated with prolonged intubation or increased postoperative ECMO support in the primary bilateral, primary single, and redo bilateral-lung transplant cohorts but did not affect these outcomes following redo single-lung transplantation. CONCLUSIONS: Since prolonged allograft ischemia correlates with worse transplant outcomes, the decision to use donor lungs with extended ischemic times must consider the specific benefits and risks associated with individual recipient factors and institutional expertise.

Outcomes of Recipients Aged 65 Years and Older Bridged to Lung Transplant With Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation.

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) as a bridge to lung transplant (BTT) has been used for critically ill candidates with excellent outcomes, but data on this strategy in older recipients remain limited. We compared outcomes of no BTT, mechanical ventilation (MV)-only BTT, and ECMO BTT in recipients of greater than or equal to 65 years. Lung-only recipients of greater than or equal to 65 years in the United Network for Organ Sharing database between 2008 and 2022 were included and stratified by bridging strategy. Of the 9,936 transplants included, 226 (2.3%) were MV-only BTT and 159 (1.6%) were ECMO BTT. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation BTT recipients were more likely to have restrictive disease pathology, had higher median lung allocation score, and spent fewer days on the waitlist (all p < 0.001). Compared to no-BTT recipients, ECMO BTT recipients were more likely to be intubated or on ECMO at 72 hours posttransplant and had longer hospital lengths of stay (all p < 0.001). Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation BTT recipients had increased risk of 3 years mortality compared to both no-BTT (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] = 1.48 [95% confidence interval {CI}: 1.14-1.91], p = 0.003) and MV-only recipients (aHR = 1.50 [95% CI: 1.08-2.07], p = 0.02). Overall, we found that ECMO BTT in older recipients is associated with inferior posttransplant outcomes compared to MV-only or no BTT, but over half of recipients remained alive at 3 years posttransplant.

Outcomes of Lung Transplant Candidates Aged ≥70 Years During the Lung Allocation Score Era.

BACKGROUND: With the increasing age of lung transplant candidates, we studied waitlist and posttransplantation outcomes of candidates ≥70 years during the Lung Allocation Score era. METHODS: Adult lung transplant candidates from 2005 to 2020 in the United Network for Organ Sharing database were included and stratified on the basis of age at listing into 18 to 59 years old, 60 to 69 years old, and ≥70 years old. Baseline characteristics, waitlist outcomes, and posttransplantation outcomes were assessed. RESULTS: A total of 37,623 candidates were included (52.3% aged 18-59 years, 40.6% aged 60-69 years, 7.1% aged ≥70 years). Candidates ≥70 years were more likely than younger candidates to receive a transplant (81.9% vs 72.7% [aged 60-69 years] vs 61.6% [aged 18-59 years]) and less likely to die or to deteriorate on the waitlist within 1 year (9.1% vs 10.1% [aged 60-69 years] vs 12.2% [aged 18-59 years]; P < .001). Donors for older recipients were more likely to be extended criteria (75.7% vs 70.1% [aged 60-69 years] vs 65.7% [aged 18-59 years]; P < .001). Recipients ≥70 years were found to have lower rates of acute rejection (6.7% vs 7.4% [aged 60-69 years] vs 9.2% [aged 18-59 years]; P < .001) and prolonged intubation (21.7% vs 27.4% [aged 60-69 years] vs 34.5% [aged 18-59 years]; P < .001). Recipients aged ≥70 years had increased 1-year (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.19 [95% CI, 1.06-1.33]; P < .001), 3-year (aHR, 1.28 [95% CI, 1.18-1.39]; P < .001), and 5-year mortality (aHR, 1.29 [95% CI, 1.21-1.38]; P < .001) compared with recipients aged 60 to 69 years. CONCLUSIONS: Candidates ≥70 years had favorable waitlist and perioperative outcomes despite increased use of extended criteria donors. Careful selection of candidates and postoperative surveillance may improve posttransplantation survival in this population.

Impact of Dual Thoracic Recovery from Circulatory Death Donors on Heart and Lung Transplant Outcomes.

OBJECTIVES: Concomitant heart and lung recovery can result in increased operative complexity, ischemic time, and competition for resources and anatomic territory. Dual thoracic recovery from circulatory death donors (DCD) may have additional risks that are not fully understood. We investigated the effects of dual heart and lung recovery from DCD donors on thoracic transplant outcomes. METHODS: Using the United Network for Organ Sharing database, we categorized all adult thoracic DCD transplants 2019-2023 by whether the donor heart, lung, or both (dual donors) were recovered. Heart and lung transplant outcomes were compared between dual recovery donors and heart-only or lung-only donors, respectively, using multivariable analyses. RESULTS: Of the 2,513 donors included, 42.9% were heart-only,45.0% were lung-only, and 12.0% were dual donors. Recipients of dual versus heart-only donors had similar likelihood of post-transplant dialysis (18.9% vs. 18.3%, p=0.84), likelihood of stroke (2.9% vs. 4.7%, p=0.34), and 2-year risk of mortality (aHR 1.15 [95% CI: 0.90-1.47], p=0.26), but lower likelihood of acute rejection (10.2% vs. 16.1%, p=0.04). Recipients of dual and lung-only donors had similar likelihood of pre-discharge acute rejection (7.6% vs. 8.5%, p=0.70), intubation at 72 hours (38.9% vs. 45.1%, p=0.13), and ECMO at 72 hours (13.1% vs. 18.1%, p=0.11), as well as 2-year risk of mortality (aHR 1.16 [95% CI: 0.74-1.82], p=0.52). CONCLUSIONS: Recovering both the heart and lungs from a DCD donor does not negatively impact transplant outcomes. Outcomes in this population should continue to be investigated as more data and longer-term follow up become available.