Remote ex vivo lung perfusion at a centralized evaluation facility
In the US, only 23% of lungs offered for transplantation are transplanted. Ex vivo lung perfusion (EVLP) allows for evaluation of additional donor lungs; its adoption has been limited by resources and expertise. Dedicated facilities with a centralized lung evaluation system (CLES) could expand acces...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | The Journal of heart and lung transplantation 2022-12, Vol.41 (12), p.1700-1711 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 1711 |
---|---|
container_issue | 12 |
container_start_page | 1700 |
container_title | The Journal of heart and lung transplantation |
container_volume | 41 |
creator | Mallea, Jorge M. Hartwig, Matthew G. Keller, Cesar A. Kon, Zachary III, Richard N. Pierson Erasmus, David B. Roberts, Michael Patzlaff, Natalie E. Johnson, Dana Sanchez, Pablo G. D'Cunha, Jonathan Brown, A. Whitney Dilling, Daniel F. McCurry, Kenneth |
description | In the US, only 23% of lungs offered for transplantation are transplanted. Ex vivo lung perfusion (EVLP) allows for evaluation of additional donor lungs; its adoption has been limited by resources and expertise. Dedicated facilities with a centralized lung evaluation system (CLES) could expand access to EVLP.
In this unblinded, nonrandomized, traditional feasibility study, 7 US transplant centers referred lungs declined for standard transplantation to a dedicated EVLP facility, which utilized a CLES. EVLP was remotely monitored by the transplant teams. CLES lungs were matched with contemporaneous conventional static cold-preserved controls at each center.
A total of 115 recipients were enrolled, and 66 received allografts from 63 donors after EVLP at the dedicated CLES facility. Forty-nine contemporaneous patients served as controls. Primary graft dysfunction grade 3 at 72 hours (PGD3-72 hours) was higher in the CLES group with 16 (24%) vs 2 (4%) in the control (common RD 95% CI, 0.07-0.32; p = 0.0009). All recipients survived to 30 days and 1-year survival was similar for both groups (92% controls vs 89% CLES; common RD 95% CI, -0.14-0.08; p = 0.58). Total preservation time, hospital and ICU lengths of stay, and time to first extubation were longer in the CLES group.
Remote ex vivo perfusion of lung allografts declined for conventional transplantation at a dedicated CLES facility is feasible and resulted in additional transplants. Recipients of allografts assessed with a CLES had a higher rate of PGD3-72 hours, but similar 30-day and 1-year outcomes compared to conventional lung recipients. (NCT02234128) |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.healun.2022.09.006 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2725198011</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S1053249822021180</els_id><sourcerecordid>2725198011</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c362t-9278e22a2e1b1bf712ec4c08dcff8c2b5ffb110cfe806d24c7c390ed881f38db3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kE1Lw0AQhhdRbK3-A5EcvSTOTppmcxG0-AUFQfS8bDazuiVN6m4SrL_eLa0ePc3AvB_Mw9g5h4QDn10tkw9Sdd8kCIgJFAnA7ICNeZblccp5fhh2yNIYp4UYsRPvlwCAaYbHbJTOEIsUizG7faFV21FEX9FghzYKge_RmpzpvW2bSHWRijQ1nVO1_aYqoiF0qm57M0rb2nabU3ZkVO3pbD8n7O3-7nX-GC-eH57mN4tYh7ouLjAXhKiQeMlLk3MkPdUgKm2M0FhmxpScgzYkYFbhVOc6LYAqIbhJRVWmE3a5y1279rMn38mV9ZrqWjXU9l5ijhkvBHAepNOdVLvWe0dGrp1dKbeRHOSWnlzKHT25pSehkIFesF3sG_pyRdWf6RdXEFzvBBT-HCw56bWlRlNlHelOVq39v-EHzB6DHg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2725198011</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Remote ex vivo lung perfusion at a centralized evaluation facility</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Mallea, Jorge M. ; Hartwig, Matthew G. ; Keller, Cesar A. ; Kon, Zachary ; III, Richard N. Pierson ; Erasmus, David B. ; Roberts, Michael ; Patzlaff, Natalie E. ; Johnson, Dana ; Sanchez, Pablo G. ; D'Cunha, Jonathan ; Brown, A. Whitney ; Dilling, Daniel F. ; McCurry, Kenneth</creator><creatorcontrib>Mallea, Jorge M. ; Hartwig, Matthew G. ; Keller, Cesar A. ; Kon, Zachary ; III, Richard N. Pierson ; Erasmus, David B. ; Roberts, Michael ; Patzlaff, Natalie E. ; Johnson, Dana ; Sanchez, Pablo G. ; D'Cunha, Jonathan ; Brown, A. Whitney ; Dilling, Daniel F. ; McCurry, Kenneth</creatorcontrib><description>In the US, only 23% of lungs offered for transplantation are transplanted. Ex vivo lung perfusion (EVLP) allows for evaluation of additional donor lungs; its adoption has been limited by resources and expertise. Dedicated facilities with a centralized lung evaluation system (CLES) could expand access to EVLP.
In this unblinded, nonrandomized, traditional feasibility study, 7 US transplant centers referred lungs declined for standard transplantation to a dedicated EVLP facility, which utilized a CLES. EVLP was remotely monitored by the transplant teams. CLES lungs were matched with contemporaneous conventional static cold-preserved controls at each center.
A total of 115 recipients were enrolled, and 66 received allografts from 63 donors after EVLP at the dedicated CLES facility. Forty-nine contemporaneous patients served as controls. Primary graft dysfunction grade 3 at 72 hours (PGD3-72 hours) was higher in the CLES group with 16 (24%) vs 2 (4%) in the control (common RD 95% CI, 0.07-0.32; p = 0.0009). All recipients survived to 30 days and 1-year survival was similar for both groups (92% controls vs 89% CLES; common RD 95% CI, -0.14-0.08; p = 0.58). Total preservation time, hospital and ICU lengths of stay, and time to first extubation were longer in the CLES group.
Remote ex vivo perfusion of lung allografts declined for conventional transplantation at a dedicated CLES facility is feasible and resulted in additional transplants. Recipients of allografts assessed with a CLES had a higher rate of PGD3-72 hours, but similar 30-day and 1-year outcomes compared to conventional lung recipients. (NCT02234128)</description><identifier>ISSN: 1053-2498</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1557-3117</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.healun.2022.09.006</identifier><identifier>PMID: 36229329</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>cold ischemia time ; donation after cardiac death ; EVLP ; Extracorporeal Circulation ; Feasibility Studies ; Humans ; Lung ; lung transplant ; Lung Transplantation - methods ; Organ Preservation - methods ; Perfusion - methods ; PGD3 ; Tissue Donors</subject><ispartof>The Journal of heart and lung transplantation, 2022-12, Vol.41 (12), p.1700-1711</ispartof><rights>2022 The Authors</rights><rights>Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c362t-9278e22a2e1b1bf712ec4c08dcff8c2b5ffb110cfe806d24c7c390ed881f38db3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c362t-9278e22a2e1b1bf712ec4c08dcff8c2b5ffb110cfe806d24c7c390ed881f38db3</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-3764-4590 ; 0000-0003-4962-8838 ; 0000-0001-8393-2791 ; 0000-0002-7127-598X ; 0000-0002-9723-510X</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1053249822021180$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3537,27901,27902,65306</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36229329$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Mallea, Jorge M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hartwig, Matthew G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Keller, Cesar A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kon, Zachary</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>III, Richard N. Pierson</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Erasmus, David B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Roberts, Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Patzlaff, Natalie E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Johnson, Dana</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sanchez, Pablo G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>D'Cunha, Jonathan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brown, A. Whitney</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dilling, Daniel F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McCurry, Kenneth</creatorcontrib><title>Remote ex vivo lung perfusion at a centralized evaluation facility</title><title>The Journal of heart and lung transplantation</title><addtitle>J Heart Lung Transplant</addtitle><description>In the US, only 23% of lungs offered for transplantation are transplanted. Ex vivo lung perfusion (EVLP) allows for evaluation of additional donor lungs; its adoption has been limited by resources and expertise. Dedicated facilities with a centralized lung evaluation system (CLES) could expand access to EVLP.
In this unblinded, nonrandomized, traditional feasibility study, 7 US transplant centers referred lungs declined for standard transplantation to a dedicated EVLP facility, which utilized a CLES. EVLP was remotely monitored by the transplant teams. CLES lungs were matched with contemporaneous conventional static cold-preserved controls at each center.
A total of 115 recipients were enrolled, and 66 received allografts from 63 donors after EVLP at the dedicated CLES facility. Forty-nine contemporaneous patients served as controls. Primary graft dysfunction grade 3 at 72 hours (PGD3-72 hours) was higher in the CLES group with 16 (24%) vs 2 (4%) in the control (common RD 95% CI, 0.07-0.32; p = 0.0009). All recipients survived to 30 days and 1-year survival was similar for both groups (92% controls vs 89% CLES; common RD 95% CI, -0.14-0.08; p = 0.58). Total preservation time, hospital and ICU lengths of stay, and time to first extubation were longer in the CLES group.
Remote ex vivo perfusion of lung allografts declined for conventional transplantation at a dedicated CLES facility is feasible and resulted in additional transplants. Recipients of allografts assessed with a CLES had a higher rate of PGD3-72 hours, but similar 30-day and 1-year outcomes compared to conventional lung recipients. (NCT02234128)</description><subject>cold ischemia time</subject><subject>donation after cardiac death</subject><subject>EVLP</subject><subject>Extracorporeal Circulation</subject><subject>Feasibility Studies</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Lung</subject><subject>lung transplant</subject><subject>Lung Transplantation - methods</subject><subject>Organ Preservation - methods</subject><subject>Perfusion - methods</subject><subject>PGD3</subject><subject>Tissue Donors</subject><issn>1053-2498</issn><issn>1557-3117</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kE1Lw0AQhhdRbK3-A5EcvSTOTppmcxG0-AUFQfS8bDazuiVN6m4SrL_eLa0ePc3AvB_Mw9g5h4QDn10tkw9Sdd8kCIgJFAnA7ICNeZblccp5fhh2yNIYp4UYsRPvlwCAaYbHbJTOEIsUizG7faFV21FEX9FghzYKge_RmpzpvW2bSHWRijQ1nVO1_aYqoiF0qm57M0rb2nabU3ZkVO3pbD8n7O3-7nX-GC-eH57mN4tYh7ouLjAXhKiQeMlLk3MkPdUgKm2M0FhmxpScgzYkYFbhVOc6LYAqIbhJRVWmE3a5y1279rMn38mV9ZrqWjXU9l5ijhkvBHAepNOdVLvWe0dGrp1dKbeRHOSWnlzKHT25pSehkIFesF3sG_pyRdWf6RdXEFzvBBT-HCw56bWlRlNlHelOVq39v-EHzB6DHg</recordid><startdate>202212</startdate><enddate>202212</enddate><creator>Mallea, Jorge M.</creator><creator>Hartwig, Matthew G.</creator><creator>Keller, Cesar A.</creator><creator>Kon, Zachary</creator><creator>III, Richard N. Pierson</creator><creator>Erasmus, David B.</creator><creator>Roberts, Michael</creator><creator>Patzlaff, Natalie E.</creator><creator>Johnson, Dana</creator><creator>Sanchez, Pablo G.</creator><creator>D'Cunha, Jonathan</creator><creator>Brown, A. Whitney</creator><creator>Dilling, Daniel F.</creator><creator>McCurry, Kenneth</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>6I.</scope><scope>AAFTH</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3764-4590</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4962-8838</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8393-2791</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7127-598X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9723-510X</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202212</creationdate><title>Remote ex vivo lung perfusion at a centralized evaluation facility</title><author>Mallea, Jorge M. ; Hartwig, Matthew G. ; Keller, Cesar A. ; Kon, Zachary ; III, Richard N. Pierson ; Erasmus, David B. ; Roberts, Michael ; Patzlaff, Natalie E. ; Johnson, Dana ; Sanchez, Pablo G. ; D'Cunha, Jonathan ; Brown, A. Whitney ; Dilling, Daniel F. ; McCurry, Kenneth</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c362t-9278e22a2e1b1bf712ec4c08dcff8c2b5ffb110cfe806d24c7c390ed881f38db3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>cold ischemia time</topic><topic>donation after cardiac death</topic><topic>EVLP</topic><topic>Extracorporeal Circulation</topic><topic>Feasibility Studies</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Lung</topic><topic>lung transplant</topic><topic>Lung Transplantation - methods</topic><topic>Organ Preservation - methods</topic><topic>Perfusion - methods</topic><topic>PGD3</topic><topic>Tissue Donors</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Mallea, Jorge M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hartwig, Matthew G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Keller, Cesar A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kon, Zachary</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>III, Richard N. Pierson</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Erasmus, David B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Roberts, Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Patzlaff, Natalie E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Johnson, Dana</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sanchez, Pablo G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>D'Cunha, Jonathan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brown, A. Whitney</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dilling, Daniel F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McCurry, Kenneth</creatorcontrib><collection>ScienceDirect Open Access Titles</collection><collection>Elsevier:ScienceDirect:Open Access</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>The Journal of heart and lung transplantation</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Mallea, Jorge M.</au><au>Hartwig, Matthew G.</au><au>Keller, Cesar A.</au><au>Kon, Zachary</au><au>III, Richard N. Pierson</au><au>Erasmus, David B.</au><au>Roberts, Michael</au><au>Patzlaff, Natalie E.</au><au>Johnson, Dana</au><au>Sanchez, Pablo G.</au><au>D'Cunha, Jonathan</au><au>Brown, A. Whitney</au><au>Dilling, Daniel F.</au><au>McCurry, Kenneth</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Remote ex vivo lung perfusion at a centralized evaluation facility</atitle><jtitle>The Journal of heart and lung transplantation</jtitle><addtitle>J Heart Lung Transplant</addtitle><date>2022-12</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>41</volume><issue>12</issue><spage>1700</spage><epage>1711</epage><pages>1700-1711</pages><issn>1053-2498</issn><eissn>1557-3117</eissn><abstract>In the US, only 23% of lungs offered for transplantation are transplanted. Ex vivo lung perfusion (EVLP) allows for evaluation of additional donor lungs; its adoption has been limited by resources and expertise. Dedicated facilities with a centralized lung evaluation system (CLES) could expand access to EVLP.
In this unblinded, nonrandomized, traditional feasibility study, 7 US transplant centers referred lungs declined for standard transplantation to a dedicated EVLP facility, which utilized a CLES. EVLP was remotely monitored by the transplant teams. CLES lungs were matched with contemporaneous conventional static cold-preserved controls at each center.
A total of 115 recipients were enrolled, and 66 received allografts from 63 donors after EVLP at the dedicated CLES facility. Forty-nine contemporaneous patients served as controls. Primary graft dysfunction grade 3 at 72 hours (PGD3-72 hours) was higher in the CLES group with 16 (24%) vs 2 (4%) in the control (common RD 95% CI, 0.07-0.32; p = 0.0009). All recipients survived to 30 days and 1-year survival was similar for both groups (92% controls vs 89% CLES; common RD 95% CI, -0.14-0.08; p = 0.58). Total preservation time, hospital and ICU lengths of stay, and time to first extubation were longer in the CLES group.
Remote ex vivo perfusion of lung allografts declined for conventional transplantation at a dedicated CLES facility is feasible and resulted in additional transplants. Recipients of allografts assessed with a CLES had a higher rate of PGD3-72 hours, but similar 30-day and 1-year outcomes compared to conventional lung recipients. (NCT02234128)</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>36229329</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.healun.2022.09.006</doi><tpages>12</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3764-4590</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4962-8838</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8393-2791</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7127-598X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9723-510X</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1053-2498 |
ispartof | The Journal of heart and lung transplantation, 2022-12, Vol.41 (12), p.1700-1711 |
issn | 1053-2498 1557-3117 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2725198011 |
source | MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals |
subjects | cold ischemia time donation after cardiac death EVLP Extracorporeal Circulation Feasibility Studies Humans Lung lung transplant Lung Transplantation - methods Organ Preservation - methods Perfusion - methods PGD3 Tissue Donors |
title | Remote ex vivo lung perfusion at a centralized evaluation facility |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-30T16%3A21%3A16IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Remote%20ex%20vivo%20lung%20perfusion%20at%20a%20centralized%20evaluation%20facility&rft.jtitle=The%20Journal%20of%20heart%20and%20lung%20transplantation&rft.au=Mallea,%20Jorge%20M.&rft.date=2022-12&rft.volume=41&rft.issue=12&rft.spage=1700&rft.epage=1711&rft.pages=1700-1711&rft.issn=1053-2498&rft.eissn=1557-3117&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.healun.2022.09.006&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2725198011%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2725198011&rft_id=info:pmid/36229329&rft_els_id=S1053249822021180&rfr_iscdi=true |