Lung Transplantation After Ex Vivo Lung Perfusion: Early Outcomes From a US National Registry

The Year in Cardiothoracic Transplant Anesthesia: Selected Highlights From 2022 Part I: Lung Transplantation

These highlights focus on the research in lung transplantation (LTX) that was published in 2022 and includes the assessment and optimization of candidates for LTX, donor optimization, the use of organs from donation after circulatory death, and outcomes when using marginal or novel donors; recipient factors affecting LTX, including age, disease, the use of extracorporeal life support; and special situations, such as coronavirus disease2019, pediatric LTX, and retransplantation. The remainder of the article focuses on the perioperative management of LTX, including the perioperative risk factors for acute renal failure (acute kidney injury); the incidence and management of phrenic nerve injury, delirium, and pain; and the postoperative management of hyperammonemia, early postoperative infections, and the use of donor-derived cell-free DNA to detect rejection.

National utilization, trends, and lung transplant outcomes of static versus portable ex vivo lung perfusion platforms

BACKGROUND

This study compared utilization and outcomes of the 2 widely utilized ex vivo lung perfusion (EVLP) platforms in the United States: a static platform and a portable platform.

METHODS

Adult (age 18 years or older) bilateral lung-only transplants utilizing EVLP between February 28, 2018, and December 31, 2022, in the United Network for Organ Sharing database were included. Predischarge acute rejection, intubation at 72 hours posttransplant, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation at 72 hours posttransplant, primary graft dysfunction grade 3 at 72 hours posttransplant, 30-day mortality, and 1-year mortality were evaluated using multivariable regressions.

RESULTS

Overall, 607 (6.3%) lung transplants during the study period used EVLP (51.2% static, 48.8% portable). Static EVLP was primarily utilized in the eastern United States, whereas portable EVLP was primarily utilized in the western United States. Static EVLP donors were more likely to be donation after circulatory death (33.4% vs 26.0%; P = .005), have a >20 pack-year smoking history (13.5% vs 6.5%; P = .005), and be extended criteria donors (92.3% vs 85.0%; P = .013), whereas portable EVLP donors were more likely to be older than age 55 years (14.2% vs 8.0%; P = .02). Transplants utilizing the static and portable platforms had similar risk of acute rejection, intubation at 72 hours, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation at 72 hours, primary graft dysfunction grade 3 at 72 hours, and posttransplant mortality at 30 days and 1 year (all P values > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

The static and portable platforms had significant differences in donor characteristics and geographic distributions of utilization. Despite this, posttransplant survival was similar between the 2 EVLP platforms.

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.

Current status and future potential of ex vivo lung perfusion in clinical lung transplantation

Lung transplantation is accepted as a well-established and effective treatment for patients with end-stage lung disease. While the number of candidates added to the waitlist continues to rise, the number of transplants performed remains limited by the number of suitable organ donors. Ex vivo lung perfusion (EVLP) emerged as a method of addressing the organ shortage by allowing the evaluation and potential reconditioning of marginal donor lungs or minimizing risks of prolonged ischemic time due to logistical challenges. The currently available FDA-approved EVLP systems have demonstrated excellent outcomes in clinical trials, and retrospective studies have demonstrated similar post-transplant survival between recipients who received marginal donor lungs perfused using EVLP and recipients who received standard criteria lungs stored using conventional methods. Despite this, widespread utilization has plateaued in the last few years, likely due to the significant costs associated with initiating EVLP programs. Centralized, dedicated EVLP perfusion centers are currently being investigated as a potential method of further expanding utilization of this technology. In the preclinical setting, potential applications of EVLP that are currently being studied include prolongation of organ preservation, reconditioning of unsuitable lungs, and further enhancement of already suitable lungs. As adoption of EVLP technology becomes more widespread, we may begin to see future implementation of these potential applications into the clinical setting.

Lung transplantation after ex vivo lung perfusion versus static cold storage: An institutional cost analysis

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.

Textbook surgical outcome in lung transplantation: Analysis of a US national registry

Textbook surgical outcome (TO) is a novel composite quality measure in lung transplantation (LTx). Compared to one-year survival metrics, TO may better differentiate center performance, and motivate improvements in care. To understand the feasibility of implementing this metric, we defined TO in LTx using US national data, and evaluated its ability to predict post-transplant outcomes and differentiate center performance. Adult patients who underwent isolated LTx between 2016-2019 were included. TO was defined as freedom from post-transplant length of stay >30 days, 90-day mortality, intubation or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation at 72 hours post-transplant, post-transplant ventilator support lasting ≥5 days, postoperative airway dehiscence, inpatient dialysis, pre-discharge acute rejection, and grade 3 primary graft dysfunction at 72 hours. Recipient and donor characteristics and post-transplant outcomes were compared between patients who achieved and failed TO. Of 8959 lung transplant recipients, 4664 (52.1%) achieved TO. Patient and graft survival were improved among patients who achieved TO (both log-rank p<0.0001). Among 62 centers, adjusted rates of TO ranged from 27.0% to 72.4% reflecting a wide variability in center-level performance. TO defined using national data may represent a novel composite metric to guide quality improvement in LTx across US transplant centers. Summary: In this study we defined textbook outcome (TO) for lung transplantation (LTx) using US national data. We found that achievement of TO was associated with improved post-transplant survival, and wide variability in center-level LTx performance. These findings suggest that TO could be readily implemented to compare quality of care among US LTx centers. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Lung transplantation using allografts with more than 8 hours of ischemic time: A single-institution experience

BACKGROUND

Six hours was historically regarded as the limit of acceptable ischemic time for lung allografts. However, broader sharing of donor lungs often necessitates use of allografts with ischemic time >6 hours. We characterized the association between ischemic time ≥8 hours and outcomes after lung transplantation using a contemporary cohort from a high-volume institution.

METHODS

Patients who underwent primary isolated bilateral lung transplantation between 1/2016 and 5/2020 were included. Patients bridged to transplant with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation or mechanical ventilation, and ex-vivo perfusion cases were excluded. Recipients were stratified by total allograft ischemic time <8 hours (standard) vs ≥8 hours (long). Perioperative outcomes and post-transplant survival were compared between groups.

RESULTS

Of 358 patients, 95 (26.5%) received long ischemic time (≥8 hours) lungs. Long ischemic time recipients were more likely to be male and have donation after circulatory death donors than standard ischemic time recipients. On unadjusted analysis, long and standard ischemic time recipients had similar survival, and similar rates of grade 3 primary graft dysfunction at 72 hours, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation post-transplant, acute rejection within 30 days, reintubation, and post-transplant length of stay. After adjustment, long and standard ischemic time recipients had comparable risks of mortality or graft failure.

CONCLUSIONS

In a modern cohort, use of lung allografts with "long" ischemic time ≥8 hours were associated with acceptable perioperative outcomes and post-transplant survival. Further investigation is required to better understand how broader use impacts post-lung transplant outcomes and the implications for smarter sharing under an evolving national allocation policy.

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.

Subnormothermic ex vivo lung perfusion attenuates graft inflammation in a rat transplant model

OBJECTIVE

Ex vivo lung perfusion has emerged as a novel technique to safely preserve lungs before transplantation. Recent studies have demonstrated an accumulation of inflammatory molecules in the perfusate during ex vivo lung perfusion. These proinflammatory molecules, including damage-associated molecular patterns and inflammatory cytokines, may contribute to acute and chronic allograft dysfunction. At present, ex vivo lung perfusion is performed clinically at normothermic temperature (37°C). The effect of lowering temperature to the subnormothermic range during ex vivo lung perfusion has not been reported. In this study, we hypothesized that lower ex vivo lung perfusion temperature will lead to a reduction in allograft inflammation and result in improved post-transplant graft function.

METHODS

Lewis rat heart-lung blocs underwent 4 hours of ex vivo lung perfusion in 3 temperature groups: 37°C (MP37), 30°C (MP30), and 25°C (MP25). In the control group, lung grafts were preserved by static cold storage before transplantation. After ex vivo lung perfusion or static cold storage, the left lung was transplanted for 2 hours before the animal was killed. Sera and tissue were collected and analyzed.

RESULTS

There were no differences in partial pressure of arterial oxygenation to fraction of inspired oxygen ratios during 4 hours of ex vivo lung perfusion between temperature groups. Tumor necrosis factor α significantly increased in the MP37 group during ex vivo lung perfusion, whereas this was not seen at lower temperatures. Extracellular DNA and high-mobility group box 1 perfusate concentrations increased significantly during ex vivo lung perfusion in all groups, but the rate of increase was diminished at lower temperature. Two hours post-transplant, there were no significant differences in partial pressure of arterial oxygenation to fraction of inspired oxygen ratios of the lung graft or serum damage-associated molecular pattern levels among groups. On histologic grading after transplantation, greater injury was observed in the MP30 and MP37 groups, but not MP25, when compared with static cold storage.

CONCLUSIONS

Subnormothermic ex vivo lung perfusion at 25°C reduces the production of inflammatory mediators during ex vivo lung perfusion and is associated with reduced histologic graft injury after transplantation.