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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Robotic-assisted lung transplantation: First in man.

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

Heart transplantation in patients from socioeconomically distressed communities.

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

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

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

Bicuspid aortic stenosis: National three-year outcomes of transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement among Medicare beneficiaries.

OBJECTIVE: Randomized trials of transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacements have excluded bicuspid anatomy. We compared 3-year outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement versus surgical aortic valve replacement in patients aged more than 65 years with bicuspid aortic stenosis. METHODS: The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid data were used to identify 6450 patients undergoing isolated surgical aortic valve replacement (n = 3771) or transcatheter aortic valve replacement (n = 2679) for bicuspid aortic stenosis (2012-2019). Propensity score matching with 21 baseline characteristics including frailty created 797 pairs. RESULTS: Unmatched patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement were older than patients undergoing surgical aortic valve replacement (78 vs 70 years), with more comorbidities and frailty (all P < .001). After matching, transcatheter aortic valve replacement was associated with a similar mortality risk compared with surgical aortic valve replacement within the first 6 months (hazard ratio [HR], 1.08, 95% CI, 0.67-1.69) but a higher mortality risk between 6 months and 3 years (HR, 2.16, 95% CI, 1.22-3.83). Additionally, transcatheter aortic valve replacement was associated with a lower risk of heart failure readmissions before 6 months (HR, 0.51, 95% CI, 0.31-0.87) but a higher risk between 6 months and 3 years (HR, 4.78, 95% CI, 2.21-10.36). The 3-year risks of aortic valve reintervention (HR, 1.03, 95% CI, 0.30-3.56) and stroke (HR, 1.21, 95% CI, 0.75-1.96) were similar. CONCLUSIONS: Among matched Medicare beneficiaries undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement or surgical aortic valve replacement for bicuspid aortic stenosis, 3-year mortality was higher after transcatheter aortic valve replacement. However, transcatheter aortic valve replacement was associated with a similar risk of mortality and a lower risk of heart failure readmissions during the first 6 months after the intervention. Randomized comparative data are needed to best inform treatment choice.

Lung transplantation outcomes in patients from socioeconomically distressed communities.

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

Simultaneous Lung-Kidney Transplantation in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Simultaneous lung-kidney transplantation is rarely performed. Contemporary national practice trends and outcomes are unclear. METHODS: From the United Network for Organ Sharing database, we identified 108 lung-kidney transplant recipients (2005-2022). They were compared with isolated lung recipients with pretransplantation dialysis or estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) ≤30 mL/min per 1.73 m2 (n = 372) and isolated non-dialysis-dependent lung recipients with 30 < eGFR < 50 mL/min per 1.73 m2 (n = 1416), respectively. Lung-kidney recipients were also compared with recipients of the contralateral kidney from the same donors (n = 90). RESULTS: Lung-kidney transplantation was performed by 36 centers, with increasing annual volume (1 in 2005, 16 in 2022; P < .01). Forty percent (44/108) of lung-kidney recipients received pretransplantation dialysis, and of those without pretransplantation dialysis, median eGFR was 30.7 mL/min per 1.73 m2. Lung-kidney recipients had improved survival compared with isolated lung recipients with eGFR ≤30 mL/min per 1.73 m2 or pretransplantation dialysis (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.38-0.92). However, no survival benefit was observed when lung-kidney recipients were compared with isolated lung recipients with 30 < eGFR < 50 mL/min per 1.73 m2 and no pretransplantation dialysis (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.55-1.41). Compared with isolated kidney recipients using the contralateral kidney from the same donors, lung-kidney recipients had a higher risk of kidney allograft loss (adjusted hazard ratio, 3.27; 95% CI, 1.22-8.78), a difference largely accounted for by patient death with a functioning kidney allograft. CONCLUSIONS: Recipients of lung-kidney transplants had improved survival compared with isolated lung recipients with eGFR ≤30 mL/min per 1.73 m2 or pretransplantation dialysis. However, lung-kidney recipients had a higher rate of kidney allograft loss than recipients of the contralateral kidney allograft from the same donors.

Donation after circulatory death heart procurement strategy impacts utilization and outcomes of concurrently procured abdominal organs.

INTRODUCTION: The impact of donation after circulatory death (DCD) heart procurement techniques on the utilization and outcomes of concurrently procured DCD livers and kidneys remains unclear. METHODS: Using the United Network for Organ Sharing database, we identified 246 DCD donors whose heart was procured using direct procurement and ex-situ machine perfusion and 128 DCD donors whose heart was procured using in-situ thoracoabdominal normothermic regional perfusion (12/2019-03/2022). We evaluated the transplantation rate of concurrently procured DCD livers and kidneys (defined as the number of organs transplanted/total number of organs available for procurement) and their post-transplant outcomes. RESULTS: The transplantation rate of concurrently procured DCD livers was higher with in-situ perfusion compared to direct procurement (67.1% vs 56.5%, p = 0.045). After excluding pediatric, multiorgan, and repeat transplant recipients, there was no difference in 6-month liver graft failure rate (direct procurement 0.9% vs in-situ perfusion 0%, p > 0.99). Recipients of kidneys procured with in-situ perfusion had less delayed graft function (11.3% vs 41.5%, p < 0.0001) shorter length of stay, and lower serum creatinine at discharge (both p < 0.05). Six-month recipient survival in the direct procurement and in-situ perfusion group were similar after DCD liver and kidney transplantation (p = 0.24 and 0.79 respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Compared to direct procurement, DCD heart procurement with in-situ thoracoabdominal normothermic regional perfusion was associated with increased utilization of DCD livers and a lower incidence of delayed graft function in concurrently procured DCD kidneys. Broader implementation of DCD heart transplantation must maximize the transplant potential of concurrently procured abdominal organs and ensure their successful outcomes.

Heart retransplant recipients with renal dysfunction benefit from simultaneous heart-kidney transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Given ongoing donor shortages, appropriate patient selection for dual-organ transplantation is critical. We evaluated outcomes of heart retransplant with simultaneous kidney transplant (HRT-KT) vs isolated heart retransplant (HRT) across varying levels of renal dysfunction. METHODS: The United Network for Organ Sharing database identified 1189 adult patients undergoing heart retransplantation between 2005 and 2020. Recipients undergoing HRT-KT (n = 251) were compared to those undergoing HRT (n = 938). The primary outcome was 5-year survival; subgroup analyses and multivariable adjustment were performed utilizing the following 3 estimated glomerular filtration (eGFR) groups: <30 ml/min/1.73m2, 30-45 ml/min/1.73m2, and >45 ml/min/1.73m2. RESULTS: HRT-KT recipients were older and had longer waitlist times, longer inter-transplant periods, and lower eGFR levels. HRT-KT recipients were less likely to require pretransplant ventilator (1.2% vs 9.0%, p < 0.001) or ECMO (2.0% vs 8.3%, p < 0.001) support but were more likely to have severe functional limitation (63.4% vs 52.6%, p = 0.001). After retransplantation, HRT-KT recipients had less treated acute rejection (5.2% vs 9.3%, p = 0.02) and more dialysis requirement (29.1% vs 20.2%, p < 0.001) before discharge. Survival at 5-years was 69.1% after HRT and 80.5% after HRT-KT (p < 0.001). After adjustment, HRT-KT was associated with improved 5-year survival among recipients with eGFR <30 ml/min/1.73m2 (HR:0.42, 95% CI: 0.26-0.67) and 30 to 45 ml/min/1.73m2 (HR:0.29, 95% CI 0.13-0.65), but not among those with eGFR>45 ml/min/1.73sm2 (HR 0.68, 95% CI 0.30-1.54). CONCLUSION: Simultaneous kidney transplantation is associated with improved survival following heart retransplantation in patients with eGFR <45 ml/min/1.73m2 and should be strongly considered to optimize organ allocation stewardship.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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