Increasing the donor pool: recovery of hearts from older donors

Results After Orthotopic Heart Transplantation Accepting Donor Hearts >50 Years: Experience at La Pitie Salpetriere, Paris

INTRODUCTION

We sought to examine the results of orthotopic heart transplantation accepting hearts from donors >50 years of age with special regard to the usefulness of peripheral extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for posttransplant graft dysfunction.

PATIENTS

Between January 2000 and December 2004, a total of 247 patients underwent orthotopic heart transplantation. In 143 patients (58%) the heart donor was <50 years (group I, mean age of donor hearts 36 +/- 11 years; range, 8-49 years). In 104 recipients (42%) the heart donor was >50 years (group II, mean age of donor hearts 56 +/- 15 years; range, 50-67 years). Pretransplant characteristics of the two groups showed no significant differences.

RESULTS

The in-hospital mortality was slightly increased in group II (24% vs 20% in group I, NS) and the 5-year survival rate significantly increased in group I (75% vs 63% in group II). Freedom from transplant vasculopathy after 3 years was similar in both groups (86% in group I vs 87% in group II). A total of 25 patients (17%) in group I and 27 patients (26%) in group II developed graft dysfunction. Eleven patients in group I and 10 patients in group II were treated using peripheral extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, whereas 3 of the 11 patients in group I and 5 of the 10 patients in group II were discharged following a complete recovery. Two patients in group I and 4 patients in group II were survivors beyond year.

CONCLUSION

In our experience it was possible to increase the cardiac donor pool by accepting allografts from donors >50 years of age in selected cases. The incidence of transplant vasculopathy was not increased, whereas in-hospital mortality was slightly higher. In our limited cohort, patients with older donor hearts was developed graft dysfunction profited from primary extracorporeal membrane oxygenation implantation, an indication that should be examined further without delay.

Cadaveric organ donor recruitment at Los Angeles County Hospital: improvement after formation of a structured clinical, educational and administrative service

BACKGROUND/AIMS

There remains a critical shortage of cadaveric organs. At a large inner city level one trauma centre, several strategies were devised and combined to (a). optimize the physiologic status of potential donors, (b). promote awareness of the donation process among health care professionals and (c). perform quality control on the organ donation system - all in an effort to improve organ donation rates. Resuscitative and maintenance protocols were devised and implemented through a multidisciplinary team approach for patients diagnosed with brain death. We report the effect this approach has had on organ donation in a single centre.

METHOD

A death record review (DRR) by the local organ procurement agency (OPO) was used to identify the number of patients diagnosed with brain death at Los Angeles County Hospital each year from 1995 through 2001. Data were collected to determine the number of these potential donors that eventually underwent organ donation. Data were collected for two time intervals: Phase I (1995-98) and Phase II (1999-2001). During Phase I, there was no focused institutional programme for the approach to potential donors. During Phase II, an institutional programme including the following characteristics was implemented: 1). donor resuscitation protocol, 2). assignment of a dedicated OPO coordinator liaison to interact with families, hospital personnel and the coroner's office, 3). assignment of the primary role of stabilization and care of potential donors and the integration of all medical services to the trauma service, and 4). biweekly conferences to review policies, protocols, and outcomes of donor management strategies.

RESULTS

From 1995 to 2001 there was a large increase in patient referrals for donor evaluation from 86 (Phase I) to 124 (Phase II). There was a smaller increase in the number of suitable donors: Phase I (mean: 51/year) and Phase II (mean: 63/year). There was, however, an increase in the mean number of actual organ donors from 14.2/year to 25.7/year from Phase I to Phase II and an increase in organs donated from 29 to 49. Organ donor declines decreased from 53% (Phase I) to 39% (Phase II).

CONCLUSIONS

Strategies to increase the number of cadaveric organs available for organ transplantation are crucial. A strategy combining prompt identification of potential organ donors, institution of resuscitative protocols, a multidisciplinary team approach, educational activities and utilization of personnel expert in organ procurement led to a marked increase in the number of organ donors and the number of organs donated at a single institution. Wider application of this approach should prove successful in increasing organ donation in a similar fashion in other institutions.

Heart transplantation with donors fifty years of age and older

OBJECTIVE

Limited availability of donor organs has led to the progressive expansion of the criteria for donor selection, particularly a higher age limit of potential donors. We retrospectively reviewed the outcomes of patients who underwent heart transplantation using cardiac allografts 50 years of age and older and compared them with patients who had donor organs younger than 50 years.

METHOD

Between September 1989 and May 2000, 20 patients underwent orthotopic heart transplantation using donor hearts 50 years of age and older (range 50-56 years, mean 52.7 +/- 1.8 years) and were compared with 267 patients who received donor organs less than 50 years of age (range 9-49.9 years, mean 27.2 +/- 8.6 years). Patient and donor criteria were identical in both groups. Follow-up was 4 to 128 months with a mean of 37.4 +/- 2.8 months in the older donor group and 52.6 +/- 2.4 months in the younger donor group.

RESULTS

There were no differences between these 2 cohorts of patients regarding age, sex, cardiomyopathy, preoperative cytomegalovirus status, New York Heart Association class, and transplant status at transplantation. Donor characteristics, including sex, left ventricular ejection fraction, diabetes, cytomegalovirus status, and allograft ischemic times, were also similar in the 2 groups. Donor/recipient cytomegalovirus matching showed no differences as well. Thirty-day or to discharge operative mortality was similar in the older and younger donor groups (5% +/- 4.8% vs 3.5% +/- 1.1%; P =.84). Actuarial survival at 1 and 5 years was also similar in both groups (89.7% +/- 6.9% vs 91% +/- 1.8% and 53.1% +/- 14.7% vs 71.0% +/- 3.1%, respectively; P =.59). No patient in the older donor group required coronary artery bypass grafting or retransplantation during the follow-up period, whereas 2 patients in the younger donor group required coronary artery bypass, and 5 patients underwent retransplantation (P > or =.50). Two patients in the older donor group died of nonspecific allograft failure, whereas 3 patients in the younger donor group experienced similar posttransplant complication (P > or =.50).

CONCLUSIONS

Carefully selected donor hearts 50 years of age and older can be used for heart transplantation with long-term survival and related outcomes similar to those of younger donor organs. This use of selective cardiac allografts maximizes donor organ usage and expands the donor pool effectively without an adverse impact on long-term results.

Angiography of potential cardiac donors

OBJECTIVES

This retrospective review of organ donor records was designed to evaluate the practice of donor angiography in one organ procurement organization and determine the outcomes of angiography and its impact on the timing of the organ donation process.

BACKGROUND

Concerns about transmission of atherosclerosis from donor to recipient have been heightened by the increasing prevalence of older donors. Guidelines that advocate the use of angiography in specific settings have been published, but no formal large-scale review has been performed.

METHODS

For the period January 1993 through June 1997, we reviewed all New England Organ Bank records of donors between the ages of 40 and 65 including any from whom at least one solid organ was procured. Data abstracted included the presence of risk factors, timing of the evaluation process and angiographic findings.

RESULTS

Coronary angiography was performed in 119 donors aged 40 and older; 64.7% of these hearts were transplanted. Thirty-eight hearts were transplanted from donors not subjected to angiography and outcomes were poorer compared with donors who underwent angiography. Advanced donor age was the only significant predictor of coronary artery disease. The duration of the procurement process was not prolonged by the performance of angiography.

CONCLUSIONS

Donor coronary angiography does not complicate the donation process. Older donor age is the most powerful predictor of coronary artery disease and may explain prior observations of poorer outcome with older donor hearts. These factors should be considered when angiography is performed as part of the heart donor evaluation.

Medium-term results of heart transplantation using older donor organs

BACKGROUND

Donor heart shortage has necessitated the expansion of the donor pool by the use of older hearts.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In a 13-year period, 1,070 heart transplants were performed in 1,035 adults at the German Heart Institute Berlin. We divided the patients into 3 groups: Group I, donor age <35 years (n = 524); Group II, donor age 35 to 50 years (n = 379); Group III, donor age >50 years (n = 167). We analyzed post-operative mortality (up to 30 days), cumulative survival rates, cardiac dependent morbidity, and changes in the left/right ventricular ejection fraction as well as freedom from cytomegalovirus infection and freedom from acute rejection episodes grade >/= 2 (International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation). We also calculated the rate of cardiac interventions per patient in the groups.

RESULTS

Recipients in Group III were significantly older, compared with Groups I and II. The post-operative mortality was 16.8% in Group I, 29.8% in Group II, and 23.4% in Group III. The differences were significant (p = 0. 00001) between Group I and Group II. The long-term cumulative survival rates were significantly better in Group I when compared with Groups II and III (p < 0.00001, p = 0.014), but it did not differ between Groups II and III (p = 0.18). However, cardiac morbidity in Groups I and II was significantly lower when compared with Group III (p = 0.0009, p = 0.037). Mean left and right ventricular ejection fraction was >55% and did not significantly change in groups for up to 10 years. Freedom from cytomegalovirus infection was not significantly different between Groups II and III (p = 0.09). Significantly fewer percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasties were performed in Group I, but comparable numbers were carried out in Groups II and III (p = 0.53). For retransplantation a similar situation occurred.

CONCLUSION

We did not find significant differences in the mid-term follow-up between patients who received hearts from 35- to 50-year-old donors and from those who had received hearts from donors >50 years, despite increased cardiac morbidity in Group III. Close monitoring of the coronary situation after heart transplantation and expanded indications for revascularization in Group III makes heart transplantation with older hearts a suitable option to save the lives of patients in end-stage heart failure.

Medium-term results of heart transplantation using donors over 63 years of age

BACKGROUND

The continual shortage of hearts for transplantation (HTx) led to the expansion of the donor pool by accepting older donors. We compared the medium-term follow-up of patients after HTx with older hearts (over the age of 63 years) with those of patients after HTx with younger hearts.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Since April 1994 we have used hearts for HTx from donors older than the age of 63 years. Until November 1998, 309 HTx and 9 re-HTx were performed in 309 adults with a mean age of 50.7+/-10.9 years (range 17-68 years). There were 252 men and 57 women. The patients were divided into two groups: group I--donor age under 63 years (296 patients, mean age 50.4+/-11 years; mean donor age 38.1+/-13 years; mean follow-up 1.7+/-1.6 years); group II-donor age of more than 63 years (13 patients, mean age 57.4+/-5.6 years; mean donor age 65.1+/-2.1; mean follow-up 2.2+/-1.6 years). There were no differences in the etiology of heart failure, gender, or ischemia time between the groups. The patients in group II were significantly older (P = 0.008). Multiple factors were analyzed in the groups, which included changes in the left/right ventricle ejection fraction, early postoperative mortality (up to 30 days), cumulative survival rates and cardiac-dependent morbidity [myocardial infarction, malignant arrhythmias, coronary stenosis (>50% in one of the main coronary arteries) and transplant vasculopathy]. Additionally, freedom from cytomegalovirus infection (rise of titer or seroconversion) and freedom of acute rejection episodes grade > or =2 (International Society of Heart & Lung Transplantation [ISHLT]) were analyzed.

RESULTS

After 1 year mean left and right ventricle ejection fraction were good in both groups and did not significantly change for up to 2 years. No Re-HTx was performed in group II. The early postoperative mortality was similar in both groups (P = 0.8). Also, the cumulative survival rates were similar in both groups (P = 0.87). Long-term cardiac morbidity was lower in group I (P = 0.03). The long-term freedom from cytomegalovirus infection in group I was significantly higher when compared with group II (P = 0.0002). The long-term freedom from severe rejection episodes was similar in both groups (P = 0.3)

CONCLUSION

The study found a significant increase in long-term cardiac morbidity due to more focal coronary stenosis in group II, and freedom from cytomegalovirus infection, but did not find significant differences in the long-term survival between patients who received hearts from donors of up to 63 years of age and from those more than 63 years. The acceptance of donors older than 63 years old for HTx does not worsen the outcome of the recipients. The careful selection of older donors, with close monitoring of the coronary situation after HTx and expanded indications for revascularization of older hearts, could make HTx with older hearts, even in older recipients, a safe option.

Extended donor criteria: hemodynamic follow-up of heart transplant recipients receiving a cardiac allograft from donors > or = 60 years of age

BACKGROUND

Heart transplantation (HT) has become a therapeutic option for patients suffering from endstage heart failure. The increasing demand for cardiac allografts has led to a shift toward extended donor criteria. In a retrospective analysis of 859 HT recipients, we report on the hemodynamic outcome of 19 HT patients who received cardiac allografts from donors > or =60 years of age.

METHODS

From March 1989 to December 1997, we performed 883 orthotopic HT in 74 children and 809 adults at our transplant center. Within this period, 19 patients (17 women and 2 men) received cardiac allografts from donors > or =60 years of age. Recipient age ranged from 57 to 78 years (mean, 65+/-5 years).

RESULTS

HT could be performed successfully in 19 cases. The early mortality rate was 16% (n=3). The late mortality rate was 37% (n=7). All long-term survivors are stable at New York Heart Association classification II (New York Heart Association Class II = resting hemodynamics: cardiac output normal; left ventricular end diastolic filling pressure elevated; clinically not compromised during mild to moderate workout). Although only 19 patients were retrospectively evaluated, there was a statistically significant (P<0.05) difference in survival among patients who received organs from male (11 vs. 8*) compared with female (8 vs. 2*) (*=death) donors.

CONCLUSION

In our experience, it is possible to increase the cardiac donor pool by accepting allografts from donors, preferably female, > or =60 years of age in selected cases without a coronary angiogram, if hemodynamic parameters are in a normal range on mild-to-moderate inotropic support. We do not recommend cardiac allografts from donors > or =60 if there are signs of coronary insufficiency in the electrocardiogram, if left ventricle filling pressures are above normal on mild-to-moderate inotropic support and optimum hemodynamic management, or if there are signs of segmental dysfunction or mitral insufficiency >I in the echocardiogram.