The Impact of Donor Smoking on Primary Graft Dysfunction and Mortality after Lung Transplantation.

Rationale: Primary graft dysfunction (PGD) is the leading cause of early morbidity and mortality after lung transplantation. Prior studies implicated proxy-defined donor smoking as a risk factor for PGD and mortality. Objectives: We aimed to more accurately assess the impact of donor smoke exposure on PGD and mortality using quantitative smoke exposure biomarkers. Methods: We performed a multicenter prospective cohort study of lung transplant recipients enrolled in the Lung Transplant Outcomes Group cohort between 2012 and 2018. PGD was defined as grade 3 at 48 or 72 hours after lung reperfusion. Donor smoking was defined using accepted thresholds of urinary biomarkers of nicotine exposure (cotinine) and tobacco-specific nitrosamine (4-[methylnitrosamino]-1-[3-pyridyl]-1-butanol [NNAL]) in addition to clinical history. The donor smoking-PGD association was assessed using logistic regression, and survival analysis was performed using inverse probability of exposure weighting according to smoking category. Measurements and Main Results: Active donor smoking prevalence varied by definition, with 34-43% based on urinary cotinine, 28% by urinary NNAL, and 37% by clinical documentation. The standardized risk of PGD associated with active donor smoking was higher across all definitions, with an absolute risk increase of 11.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.8% to 19.2%) by urinary cotinine, 5.7% (95% CI, -3.4% to 14.9%) by urinary NNAL, and 6.5% (95% CI, -2.8% to 15.8%) defined clinically. Donor smoking was not associated with differential post-lung transplant survival using any definition. Conclusions: Donor smoking associates with a modest increase in PGD risk but not with increased recipient mortality. Use of lungs from smokers is likely safe and may increase lung donor availability. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT00552357).

Reevaluating Rehabilitation Practice for Patients Who Were Critically Ill After COVID-19 Infection: An Administrative Case Report.

OBJECTIVE: The goal of this case report is to describe the process, challenges, and opportunities of implementing rehabilitation for individuals who were critically ill and required both mechanical ventilation (MV) and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) support following a coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) infection in an academic medical center. METHODS: This administrative case report is set in a heart and vascular intensive care unit, a 35-bed critical care unit that provides services for patients with various complex cardiovascular surgical interventions, including transplantation. Patients were admitted to the heart and vascular intensive care unit with either COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome or pulmonary fibrosis for consideration of bilateral orthotropic lung transplantation. The authors describe the process of establishing rehabilitation criteria for patients who, by previously established guidelines, would be considered too ill to engage in rehabilitation. RESULTS: The rehabilitation team, in coordination with an interprofessional team of critical care providers including physicians, respiratory care providers, perfusionists, and registered nurses, collaborated to implement a rehabilitation program for patients with critical COVID-19 being considered for bilateral orthotropic lung transplantation. This was accomplished by (1) reviewing previously published guidelines and practices; (2) developing an interdisciplinary framework for the consideration of rehabilitation treatment; and (3) implementing the framework for patients in our heart and vascular intensive care unit. CONCLUSION: In response to the growing volume of patients admitted with critical COVID-19, the team initiated and developed an interprofessional framework and successfully provided rehabilitation services to patients who were critically ill. While resource-intensive, the process demonstrates that rehabilitation can be implemented on a case-by-case basis for select patients receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and MV, who would previously have been considered too critically ill for rehabilitation services. IMPACT: Rehabilitating patients with end-stage pulmonary disease on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and MV support is challenging but feasible with appropriate interprofessional collaboration and knowledge sharing.

Declining to Provide or Continue Requested Life-Sustaining Treatment: Experience With a Hospital Resolving Conflict Policy.

In 2015, the major critical care societies issued guidelines outlining a procedural approach to resolving intractable conflict between healthcare professionals and surrogates over life-sustaining treatments (LST). We report our experience with a resolving conflict procedure. This was a retrospective, single-centre cohort study of ethics consultations involving intractable conflict over LST. The resolving conflict process was initiated eleven times for ten patients over 2,015 ethics consultations from 2000 to 2020. In all cases, the ethics committee recommended withdrawal of the contested LST. In seven cases, the patient died or was transferred or a legal injunction was obtained before completion of the process. In the four cases in which LST was withdrawn, the time from ethics consultation to withdrawal of LST was 24.8 ± 12.2 days. Healthcare provider and surrogate were often distressed during the process, sometimes resulting in escalation of conflict and legal action. In some cases, however, surrogates appeared relieved that they did not have to make the final decision regarding LST. Challenges regarding implementation included the time needed for process completion and limited usefulness in emergent situations. Although it is feasible to implement a due process approach to conflict over LST, there are factors that limit the procedure's usefulness.

Infectious complications associated with bronchial anastomotic dehiscence in lung transplant recipients.

INTRODUCTION: Bronchial anastomotic dehiscence (AD) is an uncommon complication following lung transplantation that carries significant morbidity and mortality. The objective of this study was to characterize fungal and bacterial infections in ADs, including whether infections following AD were associated with progression to bronchial stenosis. METHODS: This was a single-center study of 615 lung transplant recipients between 6/1/2015 and 12/31/2021. Airway complications were defined according to ISHLT consensus guidelines. RESULTS: 22 of the 615 recipients (3.6%) developed an AD. Bronchial ischemia or necrosis was common prior to dehiscence (68.1%). Fourteen (63.6%) recipients had bacterial airway infections, most commonly with Gram-negative rods, prior to dehiscence. Thirteen (59.1%) recipients had an associated pleural infection, most commonly with Candida species (30.8%). Post-dehiscence Aspergillus species were isolated in 4 recipients, 3 of which were de novo infections. Eleven had bacterial infections prior to dehiscence resolution, most commonly with Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Eleven recipients developed airway stenosis requiring dilation and/or stenting. Development of secondary infection prior to AD resolution was not associated with progression to stenosis (OR = .41, 95% CI = .05-3.30, p = .41). CONCLUSIONS: Gram-negative bacterial infections are common before and after AD. Pleural infection should be suspected in most cases. Infections prior to healing were not associated with subsequent development of airway stenosis.

Rehabilitation Characteristics and Outcomes for Lung Transplantation for COVID-19: A Case Series.

OBJECTIVE: Severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) can result in irreversible lung damage, with some individuals requiring lung transplantation. The purpose of this case series is to describe the initial experience with the rehabilitation and functional outcomes of 9 patients receiving a lung transplant for COVID-19. METHODS: Nine individuals, ranging in age from 37 to 68 years, received bilateral orthotopic lung transplantation (BOLT) for COVID-19 between December 2020 and July 2021. Rehabilitation was provided before and after the transplant, including in-hospital rehabilitation, postacute care inpatient rehabilitation, and outpatient rehabilitation. RESULTS: Progress with mobility was limited in the pretransplant phase despite rehabilitation efforts. Following transplantation, 2 individuals expired before resuming rehabilitation, and 2 others had complications that delayed their progress. The remaining 5 experienced clinically important improvements in mobility and walking capacities. CONCLUSION: Considerable rehabilitation resources are required to care for individuals both before and after BOLT for COVID-19. Rehabilitation can have a profound impact on both functional and clinical outcomes for this unique patient population. IMPACT: There is limited literature on the rehabilitation efforts and outcomes for patients who received BOLT for COVID-19. Occupational therapists and physical therapists play an important role during the pretransplant and posttransplant recovery process for this novel patient population. LAY SUMMARY: Patients with a bilateral orthotopic lung transplant due to COVID-19 require a unique rehabilitation process. They have significant difficulties with activities of daily living and functional mobility across the pretransplant and posttransplant continuum of care, but progressive gains in functional performance may be possible with a comprehensive multidisciplinary rehabilitation program.

Top Ten Tips Palliative Care Clinicians Should Know About Solid Organ Transplantation.

Solid organ transplantation (SOT) is a life-saving procedure for people with end-stage organ failure. However, patients experience significant symptom burden, complex decision making, morbidity, and mortality during both pre- and post-transplant periods. Palliative care (PC) is well suited and historically underdelivered for the transplant population. This article, written by a team of transplant specialists (surgeons, cardiologists, nephrologists, hepatologists, and pulmonologists), PC clinicians, and an ethics specialist, shares 10 high-yield tips for PC clinicians to consider when caring for SOT patients.

Experience with a Revised Hospital Policy on Not Offering Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation.

Critical care society guidelines recommend that ethics committees mediate intractable conflict over potentially inappropriate treatment, including Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) status. There are, however, limited data on cases and circumstances in which ethics consultants recommend not offering cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) despite patient or surrogate requests and whether physicians follow these recommendations. This was a retrospective cohort of all adult patients at a large academic medical center for whom an ethics consult was requested for disagreement over DNR status. Patient demographic predictors of ethics consult outcomes were analyzed. In 42 of the 116 cases (36.2%), the patient or surrogate agreed to the clinician recommended DNR order following ethics consultation. In 72 of 74 (97.3%) of the remaining cases, ethics consultants recommended not offering CPR. Physicians went on to write a DNR order without patient/surrogate consent in 57 (79.2%) of those cases. There were no significant differences in age, race/ethnicity, country of origin, or functional status between patients where a DNR order was and was not placed without consent. Physicians were more likely to place a DNR order for patients believed to be imminently dying (p = 0.007). The median time from DNR order to death was 4 days with a 90-day mortality of 88.2%. In this single-center cohort study, there was no evidence that patient demographic factors affected ethics consultants' recommendation to withhold CPR despite patient/surrogate requests. Physicians were most likely to place a DNR order without consent for imminently dying patients.

The Year in Cardiothoracic Transplant Anesthesia: Selected Highlights From 2020 Part I - Lung Transplantation.

This special article focuses on the highlights in cardiothoracic transplantation literature in the year 2020. Part I encompasses the recent literature on lung transplantation, including the advances in preoperative assessment and optimization, donor management, including the use of ex-vivo lung perfusion, recipient management, including those who have been infected with coronavirus disease 2019, updates on the perioperative management, including the use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, and long-term outcomes.

Lung transplantation outcomes after crossing low-level donor specific antibodies without planned augmented immunosuppression.

It is unknown whether some donor specific antibodies (DSA) can be crossed at the time of lung transplant without desensitization or augmented induction immunosuppression. This study assessed whether crossing low-level pre-transplant DSA (defined as mean fluorescence intensity [MFI] 1000-6000) without augmented immunosuppression is associated with worse retransplant-free or chronic lung allograft dysfunction (CLAD)-free survival. Of the 458 included recipients, low-level pre-transplant DSA was crossed in 39 (8.6%) patients. The median follow-up time was 2.2 years. There were 15 (38.5%) patients with Class I DSA and 24 (61.5%) with Class II DSA. There was no difference in adjusted overall retransplant-free survival between recipients where pre-transplant DSA was and was not crossed (HR: .98 [95% CI = .49-1.99], P = .96). There was also no difference in CLAD-free survival (HR: .71 [95% CI = .38-1.33], P = .28). There was no difference in Grade 3 PGD at 72 h (OR: 1.13 [95% CI = .52-2.48], P = .75) or definite or probable AMR (HR: 2.22 [95% CI = .64-7.61], P = .21). Lung transplantation in the presence of low-level DSA without planned augmented immunosuppression is not associated with worse overall or CLAD-free survival among recipients with intermediate-term follow-up.

Existing Crisis Standards of Care Triage Protocols May Not Significantly Differentiate Between Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019 Who Require Intensive Care.

OBJECTIVES: To determine how several existing crisis standards of care triage protocols would have distinguished between patients with coronavirus disease 2019 requiring intensive care. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Single urban academic medical center. PATIENTS: One-hundred twenty patients with coronavirus disease 2019 who required intensive care and mechanical ventilation. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The characteristics of each patient at the time of ICU triage were used to determine how patients would have been prioritized using four crisis standards of care protocols. The vast majority of patients in the cohort would have been in the highest priority group using a triage protocol focusing on Sequential Organ Failure Assessment alone. Prioritization based on Sequential Organ Failure Assessment and 1-year life expectancy would have resulted in only slightly more differentiation between patients. Prioritization based on Sequential Organ Failure Assessment and 5-year life expectancy would have added significant additional differentiation depending on how priority groups were defined. CONCLUSIONS: There is considerable controversy regarding the use of criteria other than prognosis for short-term survival in initial allocation of critical care resources under crisis standards of care triage protocols. To the extent that initial triage protocols would not create sufficient differentiation between patients, effectively resulting in a first-come, first-served initial allocation of resources, it is important to focus on how resources would be reallocated in the event of ongoing scarcity.

Ethics Consultation for Adult Solid Organ Transplantation Candidates and Recipients: A Single Centre Experience.

Systematic study of the intersection of ethics consultation services and solid organ transplants and recipients can identify and illustrate ethical issues that arise in the clinical care of these patients, including challenges beyond resource allocation. This was a single-centre, retrospective cohort study of all adult ethics consultations between January 1, 2007, and December 31, 2017, at a large academic medical centre in the north-eastern United States. Of the 880 ethics consultations, sixty (6.8 per cent ) involved solid organ transplant, thirty-nine (65.0 per cent) for candidates and twenty-one (35.0 per cent ) for recipients. Ethics consultations were requested for 4.3 per cent of heart, 4.9 per cent of lung, 0.3 per cent of liver, and 0.3 per cent of kidney transplant recipients over the study period. Nurses were more likely to request ethics consultations for recipients than physicians (80.0 per cent vs 20.0 per cent , p = 0.006). The most common reason for consultation among transplant candidates was discussion about intensity of treatment or goals of care after the patient was not or was no longer a transplant candidate. The most common reason for ethics consultation among transplant recipients was disagreement between transplant providers and patients/families/non-transplant healthcare professionals over the appropriate intensity of treatment for recipients. Very few consultations involved questions about appropriate resource allocation. Ethics consultants involved in these cases most often navigated communication challenges between transplant and non-transplant healthcare professionals and patients and families.

Mobile health technology to improve emergent frailty after lung transplantation.

We evaluated the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of a mHealth-supported physical rehabilitation intervention to treat frailty in a pilot study of 18 lung transplant recipients. Frail recipients were defined by a short physical performance battery (SPPB score ≤7). The primary intervention modality was Aidcube, a customizable rehabilitation mHealth platform. Our primary aims included tolerability, feasibility, and acceptability of use of the platform, and secondary outcomes were changes in SPPB and in scores of physical activity, and disability measured using the Duke Activity Status Index (DASI) and Lung Transplant-Value Life Activities (LT-VLA). Notably, no adverse events were reported. Subjects reported the app was easy to use, usability improved over time, and the app enhanced motivation to engage in rehabilitation. Comments highlighted the complexities of immediate post-transplant rehabilitation, including functional decline, pain, tremor, and fatigue. At the end of the intervention, SPPB scores improved a median of 5 points from a baseline of 4. Physical activity and patient-reported disability also improved. The DASI improved from 4.5 to 19.8 and LT-VLA score improved from 2 to 0.59 at closeout. Overall, utilization of a mHealth rehabilitation platform was safe and well received. Remote rehabilitation was associated with improvements in frailty, physical activity and disability. Future studies should evaluate mHealth treatment modalities in larger-scale randomized trials of lung transplant recipients.

The impact of HLA-DR mismatch status on retransplant-free survival and bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome‒free survival among sensitized lung transplant recipients.

INTRODUCTION: Donor‒recipient HLA-DR locus matching may be protective against bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome (BOS) in lung transplant recipients. It is unknown whether this benefit is more significant among sensitized (calculated panel reactive antibodies (CPRAs) of >0%) and highly sensitized (CPRAs of ≥80%) recipients who may be at a higher risk for BOS. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of adults in the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients who underwent lung transplantation between May 5, 2005 and May 31, 2019. Retransplant-free survival and BOS-free survival were compared among recipients with 0 vs ≥1 DR mismatches, grouped according to sensitization. RESULTS: Among all 20,355 included recipients, 0 DR mismatch status was associated with improved retransplant-free survival (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.83, 95% CI = 0.74-0.93, p = 0.002) and BOS-free survival (HR = 0.86, 95% CI = 0.77-0.96, p = 0.007). Among sensitized recipients, 0 DR mismatch status was also associated with improved retransplant-free survival (HR = 0.79, 95% CI = 0.65-0.97, p = 0.02) and BOS-free survival (HR = 0.82, 95% CI = 0.67-1.00, p = 0.04). There was however no difference in retransplant-free or BOS-free survival between sensitized and non-sensitized recipients with 0 DR mismatches. Among highly sensitized recipients, 0 DR mismatch status was not associated with retransplant-free or BOS-free survival. Among sensitized and highly sensitized recipients, 0 DR mismatch status was not associated with reduced use of plasmapheresis or reduced biopsy-proven, treated acute cellular rejection compared with non-sensitized recipients. CONCLUSIONS: HLA-DR matching is associated with a similar improvement in retransplant-free and BOS-free survival among non-sensitized and sensitized lung transplant recipients. DR matching does not confer a more substantial retransplant-free or BOS-free survival benefit to highly sensitized recipients than to non-sensitized recipients.

Shorter telomere length following lung transplantation is associated with clinically significant leukopenia and decreased chronic lung allograft dysfunction-free survival.

Patients with short telomeres and interstitial lung disease may have decreased chronic lung allograft dysfunction (CLAD)-free survival following lung transplantation. The relationship between post-transplant telomere length and outcomes following lung transplantation has not been characterised among all recipients, regardless of native lung disease. This was a single-centre prospective cohort study. Consenting transplant recipients had their telomere length measured using quantitative real-time PCR assays on peripheral blood collected at the time of surveillance bronchoscopy. We assessed the association between early post-transplant telomere length (as measured in the first 100 days) and CLAD-free survival, time to clinically significant leukopenia, cytomegalovirus (CMV) viraemia, chronic kidney disease, and acute cellular rejection. We also assessed the association between rate of telomere shortening and CLAD-free survival. Telomere lengths were available for 98 out of 215 (45.6%) recipients who underwent lung transplant during the study period (median measurement per patient=2 (interquartile range, 1-3)). Shorter telomere length was associated with decreased CLAD-free survival (hazard ratio (HR)=1.24; 95% CI=1.03-1.48; p=0.02), leukopenia requiring granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (HR=1.17, 95% CI=1.01-1.35, p=0.03), and CMV viraemia among CMV-mismatch recipients (HR=4.04, 95% CI=1.05-15.5, p=0.04). Telomere length was not associated with acute cellular rejection or chronic kidney disease. Recipients with more rapid loss in telomere length (defined as the highest tertile of telomere shortening) did not have worse subsequent CLAD-free survival than those without rapid loss (HR=1.38, 95% CI=0.27-7.01, p=0.70). Shorter early post-transplant telomere length is associated with decreased CLAD-free survival and clinically significant leukopenia in lung transplant recipients, regardless of native lung disease.