Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Lung transplantation after ex vivo lung perfusion versus static cold storage: An institutional cost analysis.
Halpern, Samantha E; Kesseli, Samuel J; Au, Sandra; Krischak, Madison K; Olaso, Danae G; Smith, Haley; Tipton, Greg; Jamieson, Ian R; Barbas, Andrew S; Haney, John C; Klapper, Jacob A; Hartwig, Matthew G.
Afiliación
  • Halpern SE; School of Medicine, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
  • Kesseli SJ; Department of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
  • Au S; School of Medicine, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
  • Krischak MK; School of Medicine, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
  • Olaso DG; School of Medicine, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
  • Smith H; Office of Finance, Duke Transplant Center, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
  • Tipton G; Department of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
  • Jamieson IR; Office of Finance, Duke Transplant Center, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
  • Barbas AS; Department of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
  • Haney JC; Department of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
  • Klapper JA; Department of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
  • Hartwig MG; Department of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
Am J Transplant ; 22(2): 552-564, 2022 02.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34379885
Ex vivo lung perfusion (EVLP) is a novel lung preservation strategy that facilitates the use of marginal allografts; however, it is more expensive than static cold storage (SCS). To understand how preservation method might affect postoperative costs, we compared outcomes and index hospitalization costs among matched EVLP and SCS preserved lung transplant (LTx) recipients at a single, high-volume institution. A total of 22 EVLP and 66 matched SCS LTx recipients were included; SCS grafts were further stratified as either standard-criteria (SCD) or extended-criteria donors (ECD). Median total preservation time was 857, 409, and 438 min for EVLP, SCD, and ECD lungs, respectively (p < .0001). EVLP patients had similar perioperative outcomes and posttransplant survival compared to SCS SCD and ECD recipients. Excluding device-specific costs, total direct variable costs were similar among EVLP, SCD, and ECD recipients (median $200,404, vs. $154,709 vs. $168,334, p =  .11). The median direct contribution margin was positive for EVLP recipients, and similar to that for SCD and ECD graft recipients (all p > .99). These findings demonstrate that the use of EVLP was profitable at an institutional level; however, further investigation is needed to better understand the financial implications of EVLP in facilitating donor pool expansion in an era of broader lung sharing.
Asunto(s)
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Preservación de Órganos / Trasplante de Pulmón Tipo de estudio: Health_economic_evaluation Límite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: Am J Transplant Asunto de la revista: TRANSPLANTE Año: 2022 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Estados Unidos Pais de publicación: Estados Unidos

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Preservación de Órganos / Trasplante de Pulmón Tipo de estudio: Health_economic_evaluation Límite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: Am J Transplant Asunto de la revista: TRANSPLANTE Año: 2022 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Estados Unidos Pais de publicación: Estados Unidos