Simulated Regionalization of Heart and Lung Transplantation in the United States

Association of Heart Transplant Volume with Presence of Lung Transplant Programs and Heart Transplant's SRTR One-year Survival Rating

BACKGROUND

 Several factors affect heart transplant (HTx) and lung transplant (LTx) program outcomes. Variabilities in institutional and community characteristics have been shown to influence survival. At present, half of HTx centers in the United States do not possess a concomitant LTx program. This study sought to better understand the characteristics of HTx with and without LTx programs.

METHODS

 Nationwide transplant data were collected from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) in August 2020. SRTR star rating ranges from tier 1 (lowest) to tier 5 (highest). HTx volumes and SRTR star ratings for survival were compared between the centers with heart-only (H0) programs and the centers with heart-lung (HL) programs.

RESULTS

 SRTR star ratings were available for 117 transplant centers with one or more HTx reported. The median number of HTx performed over 1 year was 16 (interquartile range [IQR]: 2-29). The number of HL centers (n = 67, 57.3%) were comparable to H0 centers (n = 50, 42.7%; p = 0.14). The HTx volume at the HL centers (28 [IQR: 17-41]) exceeded the HTx volume at the H0 centers (13 [IQR: 9-23]; p < 0.01), but were comparable to the LTx volume at the HL centers (31 [IQR: 16-46]; p = 0.25). The median HTx one-year survival rating was 3 (IQR: 2-4) at both the H0 and HL centers (p = 0.85). The HTx and LTx volumes were positively associated with the respective 1-year survivals (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

 While the presence of an LTx program is not directly associated with HTx survival, it has a positive association with the HTx volume. The HTx and LTx volumes are positively associated with the 1-year survival.

Prolonged travel time to transplantation center is associated with poor outcomes following heart transplantation

BACKGROUND

This study aims to examine the impact of home-to-transplantation center travel time as a potential barrier to healthcare accessibility.

METHODS

Observational study examined adult heart transplant recipients who received a graft between 2012 and 2022 in the United States. Travel time was calculated using the Google Distance Matrix API between the recipient's residence and transplantation center. A multivariable parametric survival model was fitted to minimize confounding bias.

RESULTS

Among the 25,923 recipients that met the selection criteria, the median travel time was 51 ​min and 95 ​% of recipients lived within a 5-h radius of their center. White recipients experienced longer median travel times (62 ​min, p ​< ​0.001) compared to Black (36 ​min) or Hispanic (40 ​min) recipients. A travel time of 1-2 ​h (survival time ratio [STR] 0.867, p ​= ​0.035) or >2 ​h (STR 0.873, p ​= ​0.026) away from the transplantation center was independently associated with lower long-term survival rates.

CONCLUSION

Extended travel times to transplantation centers may negatively impact long-term survival outcomes for heart transplant recipients, suggesting the need to address this potential barrier to healthcare accessibility.

Specialized Thoracic Adapted Recovery Model for Thoracic Organ Recovery: a 15-Year Review

BACKGROUND

To review outcomes from a regionalized heart and lung transplant service over a 15-year period.

METHODS

Data on organ procurements made by the Specialized Thoracic Adapted Recovery (STAR) team. The STAR team staff recorded data from November 2, 2004 to June 30, 2020, were reviewed.

RESULTS

The STAR teams recovered thoracic organs from 1118 donors between November 2004 and June 2020. The teams recovered 978 hearts, 823 bilateral lungs, 89 right lungs and 92 left lungs, and 8 heart and lung sets. A total of 79% of hearts and 76.1% of lungs were transplanted, whereas 2.5% of hearts and 5.1% of lungs were declined; the remainder were used for research, valves, or abandoned. A total of 47 transplantation centers received at least 1 heart, and 37 centers received at least 1 lung during this period. The 24-hour graft survival among organs recovered by STAR teams was 100% for lungs and 99% for hearts.

CONCLUSIONS

A specialized regional thoracic organ procurement team may improve transplantation rates.

Outcomes after concomitant arch replacement at the time of aortic root surgery

Background

Contemporary series of aortic arch replacement at the time of aortic root surgery are limited in number of patients and mostly address hemiarch replacement. We describe outcomes after aortic root and concomitant arch replacement, including total arch replacement.

Methods

This single-institution retrospective review studied 1196 consecutive patients from May 2004 to September 2020 who underwent first-time aortic root replacement. Patients undergoing surgery for endocarditis were excluded (n = 68, 5.7%). Patients undergoing concomitant root and arch replacement were propensity matched with patients undergoing isolated root surgery based on indication, clinical and operative characteristics, demographics, medical history including connective tissue disorders, and urgency. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards and logistic regression modeling were used to assess the primary outcome of all-cause mortality and the secondary outcomes of prolonged ventilator use, postoperative blood transfusion, and debilitating stroke, adjusted for patient and operative characteristics.

Results

Among the 1128 patients who underwent aortic root intervention during the study period, 471 (41.8%) underwent concomitant aortic arch replacement. Most underwent hemiarch replacement (n = 411, 87.4%); 59 patients (12.6%) underwent total arch replacement (with elephant trunk: n = 23, 4.9%; without elephant trunk: n = 36, 7.7%). The mean follow-up time was 4.6 years postprocedure. Operative mortality was 2.2%, and total mortality over the entire study period was 9.2%. Propensity matching generated 348 matches (295 concomitant hemiarch, 53 concomitant total arch). Concomitant hemiarch (hazard ratio, 1.00; 95% confidence interval, 0.54-1.86, P = .99) and total arch replacement (hazard ratio, 1.60, 95% confidence interval, 0.72-3.57, P = .24) were not significantly associated with increased mortality. Rates of stroke were not significantly different among each group: isolated root (n = 11/348, 3.7%), root + hemiarch (n = 17/295, 5.8%), and root + total arch (n = 3/53, 5.7%) replacement (P = .50), nor was the adjusted risk of stroke. Both concomitant arch interventions were associated with prolonged ventilator use and use of postoperative blood transfusions.

Conclusions

Hemiarch and total arch replacement are safe to perform at the time of aortic root intervention, with no significant differences in survival or stroke rates, but increased ventilator and blood product use.

Machine learning in lung transplantation: Where are we?

Lung transplantation has been accepted as a viable treatment for end-stage respiratory failure. While regression models continue to be a standard approach for attempting to predict patients' outcomes after lung transplantation, more sophisticated supervised machine learning (ML) techniques are being developed and show encouraging results. Transplant clinicians could utilize ML as a decision-support tool in a variety of situations (e.g. waiting list mortality, donor selection, immunosuppression, rejection prediction). Although for some topics ML is at an advanced stage of research (i.e. imaging and pathology) there are certain topics in lung transplantation that needs to be aware of the benefits it could provide.

The Impact of Center Volume on Outcomes in Lung Transplantation

BACKGROUND

Studies in lung transplantation have shown variable association between hospital volume and clinical outcomes. We aimed to identify the pattern of effect of hospital volume on individual patient survival after lung transplantation.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis using the United Network for Organ Sharing national thoracic organ transplantation database. Adult patients who underwent lung transplantation between January 2013 and December 2017 were included. The association between mean annual center volume and 1-year overall survival was examined using restricted cubic splines in a random effects multivariable Cox model. The volume threshold for optimal 1-year overall survival was subsequently approximated by the maximum likelihood approach using segmented linear splines in the same model.

RESULTS

The study included 10,007 patients at 71 transplant centers. Median annual center volume was 22 cases (interquartile range, 10.6 to 38). A center volume threshold was identified at 33 cases per year (95% confidence interval, 28 to 37). Higher center volume, to 33 cases per year, was associated with better 1-year survival (hazard ratio 0.989, 95% confidence interval, 0.980 to 0.999 every additional case). Further increase in center volume above 33 cases per year showed no additional benefit (hazard ratio 1.000, 95% confidence interval, 0.996 to 1.003 every additional case). Twenty-three centers (32.4%) reached the volume threshold of 33 cases per year.

CONCLUSIONS

One-year survival after lung transplantation improved with increasing center volume to as many as 33 cases per year. Low volume centers below the 33 cases per year threshold had large variations in their outcomes and had a higher risk of performing poorly, although many of them maintained good performance.

Paradoxical outcome of heart transplantation associated with institutional case volume

BACKGROUND

Previous studies in heart transplantation have shown an association between institutional case volume and outcomes. We aim to determine the case volume associated with optimal 1-year survival after transplantation.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) national database was analyzed for adult patients who underwent orthotopic heart transplantation between January 2013 and December 2017. A total of 11,196 cases at 128 transplant centers were included. Risk-adjusted restricted cubic splines revealed a non-linear association between institutional case volume and 1-year post-transplant survival. In the risk-adjusted, random-effect Cox model with segmented linear splines, higher heart transplant volume up to 24 cases per year was associated with better 1-year survival (HR = .978 every additional case, 95% CI .963-.993), and optimal survival was maintained between 24 and 38 cases per year. However, further increase in volume above 38 transplants per year was associated with mildly decreased 1-year survival (HR = 1.007 every additional case, 95% CI 1.002-1.013).

CONCLUSIONS

The relationship between institutional case volume and heart transplant 1-year survival is non-linear, with optimal survival observed at institutional case volume of 24-38 cases per year.

The Future Role of Machine Learning in Clinical Transplantation

The use of artificial intelligence and machine learning (ML) has revolutionized our daily lives and will soon be instrumental in healthcare delivery. The rise of ML is due to multiple factors: increasing access to massive datasets, exponential increases in processing power, and key algorithmic developments that allow ML models to tackle increasingly challenging questions. Progressively more transplantation research is exploring the potential utility of ML models throughout the patient journey, although this has not yet widely transitioned into the clinical domain. In this review, we explore common approaches used in ML in solid organ clinical transplantation and consider opportunities for ML to help clinicians and patients. We discuss ways in which ML can aid leverage of large complex datasets, generate cutting-edge prediction models, perform clinical image analysis, discover novel markers in molecular data, and fuse datasets to generate novel insights in modern transplantation practice. We focus on key areas in transplantation in which ML is driving progress, explore the future potential roles of ML, and discuss the challenges and limitations of these powerful tools.

Diagnostic Yield of 18F-FDG PET After Lung Transplantation: A Single-center, Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

To investigate the diagnostic yield of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (18F-FDG PET) in lung transplant recipients.

METHODS

A single-center, retrospective cohort study including 234 18F-FDG PET examinations in 199 lung transplant recipients. Indication for PET referral, 18F-FDG PET diagnosis/findings and final clinical diagnosis were classified into 3 groups: malignancy, infection/inflammation not otherwise specified, and chronic lung allograft dysfunction with restrictive allograft syndrome phenotype. Sensitivity/specificity analysis was performed to determine accuracy of 18F-FDG PET in each group.

RESULTS

Sensitivity of 18F-FDG PET for malignancy was 91.4% (95% confidence interval, 82.5%-96.0%) and specificity was 82.3% (95% confidence interval, 74.5%-88.1%). Infection/inflammation not otherwise specified and restrictive allograft syndrome as indication for 18F-FDG PET comprised relatively small groups (14 and 31 cases, respectively). In addition, 18F-FDG PET revealed clinically relevant incidental findings in 15% of cases.

CONCLUSIONS

Referral for 18F-FDG PET after lung transplantation mainly occurred to confirm or rule out malignancy. In this specific setting, 18F-FDG PET has a high diagnostic yield. Accuracy of 18F-FDG PET for other indications is less clear, given small sample sizes. Clinically relevant diagnoses, unrelated to the primary indication for 18F-FDG PET, are found relatively often in this immunocompromised cohort.

Prognostic value of pre-transplant mean pulmonary arterial pressure in lung transplant recipients: a single-institution experience

Background

Currently, lung transplantation (LTX) is considered to be a curative treatment option in patients with end-stage lung disease. Although pulmonary hypertension (PH), confirmed by cardiac catheterization, is a prognostic factor in patients undergoing LTX, the prognostic value of PH in Asian lung transplant recipients remains uncertain. In this study, we aimed to determine whether PH before LTX may serve as a prognostic factor for survival in Asian patients.

Methods

The medical records of 50 patients [male, 27; female, 23; mean age, 51.0 (41.0-60.0) years], who received preoperative right heart catheterization (RHC) and echocardiography before single or double LTX at Severance Hospital between January 2010 and December 2014, were reviewed. The relationship between 1-year survival after LTX and PH [mean pulmonary arterial pressure (mPAP) ≥25 mmHg at rest] was evaluated.

Results

The mean right ventricular systolic pressure and mPAP were 48.5 (22.8) and 30.0 (24.0-40.0) mmHg. Of the 50 patients, 17 (34.0%) died within a year after LTX. The 1-year survival rate among patients with mPAP ≥25 mmHg (58.8%) was lower than the survival rate among patients with mPAP <25 mmHg (87.5%). Pre-transplantation mPAP of ≥25 mmHg was associated with post-transplantation survival [hazard ratio (HR), 4.832; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.080-21.608, P=0.039]. The presence of preoperative PH was also associated with an increased risk of postoperative complications.

Conclusions

Confirmation of PH via preoperative cardiac catheterization was associated with the prognosis of the patient after LTX. Clinicians should consider the necessity for early transplantation surgery before the mPAP reaches ≥25 mmHg.

Worldwide trends in heart and lung transplantation: Guarding the most precious gift ever

Transplantation is sadly a therapy to die for. The survival of a recipient with end-stage heart or lung disease requires the demise of a human being through brain death or cessation of circulation, with the noblest final act of offering one's organs to another. However, transplantation is constrained by severe hemodynamic, regulatory, inflammatory, and metabolic stresses in the donor, rendering the majority of offered organs unsuitable for transplantation. Coupled with our inability to acquire exact molecular and cellular information and missed opportunities for effectively modulating deteriorations of donors and allografts, anesthesia and critical care contributes to ongoing organ shortages. Progress is made with improving waiting lists by bridging patients for transplantation using mechanical support. However, this represents more complex recipients, higher risk transplant operations, and increased resource utilization. The advent of ex vivo perfusion allows implementing novel diagnostic and therapeutic strategies with real potential of reconditioning less ideal organs. This review advocates a paradigm change in critical care management of the potential donor for improving retrieval practices and for more intellectual involvement of our specialties in organ preservation, ex vivo evaluation and reconditioning, and the need for great advancement in our efficiency in converting unacceptable allografts to suitable donor organs.