Lung transplantation after endoscopic lung volume reduction

Lung Transplant for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) carries a high burden of morbidity and mortality to patient and a high cost to health care systems. Lung transplantation is a last resort available for end-stage COPD patients interested in pursuing it and meeting the strict transplant requirements. It requires commitment from patients and their loved ones to support them through this tough process. This review will cover history of transplant, indications, candidate selection, evaluation testing, transplant listing, type of transplant (single versus bilateral), posttransplant complications, immunosuppression, and rejection. It is tailored to the COPD patient when applicable; however, many aspects of lung transplantation are shared amongst all lung diseases eligible for transplant.

Surgical and bronchoscopic pulmonary function-improving procedures in lung emphysema

COPD is a highly prevalent, chronic and irreversible obstructive airway disease without curative treatment. Standard therapeutic strategies, both non-pharmacological and pharmacological, have only limited effects on lung function parameters of patients with severe disease. Despite optimal pharmacological treatment, many patients with severe COPD still have a high burden of dyspnoea and a poor quality of life. If these patients have severe lung emphysema, with hyperinflation as the driver of symptoms and exercise intolerance, lung volume reduction may be an effective treatment with a significant impact on lung function, exercise capacity and quality of life. Currently, different lung volume reduction approaches, both surgical and bronchoscopic, have shown encouraging results and have been implemented in COPD treatment recommendations. Nevertheless, choosing the optimal lung volume reduction strategy for an individual patient remains challenging. Moreover, there is still room for improving durability of effect and safety in all available procedures. Ongoing and innovative research is essential to push this field forwards. This review provides an overview of results and limitations of the current lung volume reduction options for patients with severe lung emphysema and hyperinflation.

Lung Volume Reduction Followed by Lung Transplantation in Emphysema-A Multicenter Matched Analysis

Objective: The impact of previous lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) or endoscopic lung volume reduction (ELVR) on lung transplantation (LuTX) remains unclear. This study assesses the risk of previous lung volume reduction on the outcome of a later LuTX.

Methods: Patients suffering from emphysema who underwent bilateral LuTX were included in this multicenter analysis. Study groups were defined as: previous LVRS, previous ELVR, controls. Imbalances were corrected by coarsened exact matching for center, gender, age, diagnosis, and BMI. A comparative analysis of intraoperative characteristics, perioperative outcome and long-term survival was performed.

Results: 615 patients were included (LVRS = 26; ELVR = 60). Compared to controls, LVRS patients had a higher rate of postoperative ECMO (15.4 vs. 3.9%; p = 0.006), whereas ELVR patients suffered more often from wound infections (8.9% vs. 2.5%; p = 0.018). Perioperative outcome, duration of ventilation, ICU stay, and hospital stay were comparable between groups. Bacterial colonization of the airway differed significantly between both LVR groups and controls in pre- and post-LuTX cultures. Survival was not impacted (1-/3-/5-year survival for LVRS: 92.3%/85.7%/77.1%; controls: 91.3%/82.4%/76.3%; p = 0.58 | ELVR: 93.1%/91%/91%; controls 91.2%/81.7%/75.3%; p = 0.17).

Conclusion: Lung volume reduction does not impact short and long-time survival after bilateral LuTX. Due to differences in airway colonization after LVR, caution to prevent infectious complications is warranted.

Joint Statement of the German Respiratory Society and German Society of Thoracic Surgery in Cooperation with the German Radiological Society: Structural Prerequisites of Centres for Interventional Treatment of Emphysema

Interventional treatment of emphysema offers a wide range of surgical and endoscopic options for patients with advanced disease. Multidisciplinary collaboration of pulmonology, thoracic surgery, and imaging disciplines in patient selection, therapy, and follow-up ensures treatment quality. The present joint statement describes the required structural and quality prerequisites of treatment centres. This is a translation of the German article "Positionspapier der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Pneumologie und Beatmungsmedizin und der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Thoraxchirurgie in Kooperation mit der Deutschen Röntgengesellschaft: Strukturvoraussetzungen von Zentren für die interventionelle Emphysemtherapie" Pneumologie. 2020;74:17-23.

Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease and Lung Transplantation

Lung transplantation (LTx) has been a viable option for patients with end-stage chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), with more than 20,000 procedures performed worldwide. Survival after LTx lags behind most other forms of solid-organ transplantation, with median survival for COPD recipients being a sobering 6.0 years. Given the limited supply of suitable donor organs, not all patients with end-stage COPD are candidates for LTx. We discuss appropriate criteria for accepting patients for LTx, as well as contraindications and exclusionary criteria. In the first year post-LTx, infection and graft failure are the leading causes of death. Beyond this chronic graft rejection-currently referred to as chronic lung allograft dysfunction-represents the leading cause of death at all time points, with infection and over time malignancy also limiting survival. Referral of COPD patients to a lung transplant center should be considered in the presence of progressing disease despite maximal medical therapy. As a rule of thumb, a forced expiratory volume in 1 second < 25% predicted in the absence of exacerbation, hypoxia (PaO₂ < 60 mm Hg/8 kPa), and/or hypercapnia (PaCO₂ > 50 mm Hg/6.6 kPa) and satisfactory general clinical condition should be considered the basic prerequisites for timely referral. We also discuss salient issues post-LTx and factors that impact posttransplant survival and morbidity such as infections, malignancy, renal insufficiency, and complications associated with long-term immunosuppression.

Lung transplantation for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: past, present, and future directions

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Lung transplantation offers an effective treatment modality for patients with end-stage chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The exact determination of when to refer, list, and offer transplant as well as the preferred transplant procedure type remains unclear. Additionally, there are special considerations specific to patients with COPD being considered for lung transplantation, including the implications of single lung transplantation on lung cancer risk, native lung hyperinflation, and overall survival.

RECENT FINDINGS

The International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation's most recent recommendations rely on an assessment of COPD severity based on BODE index. Despite the lack of evidence supporting a mortality benefit of bilateral over single lung transplantation for COPD patients, the majority of transplants performed in this population remain bilateral. Some of the concerns specific to single lung transplantation remain the possibility of de novo native lung cancer and the hemodynamic and physiologic implications of acute native lung hyperinflation.

SUMMARY

COPD remains the most common worldwide indication for lung transplantation. Ongoing study is still required to assess the overall survival benefit of lung transplantation and assess the overall quality of life impact on the COPD patient population.

Lung volume reduction followed by lung transplantation-considerations on selection criteria and outcome

Lung transplantation (LuTX) and lung volume reduction (LVR), either surgical (LVRS: lung volume reduction surgery) or endoscopic (ELVR: endoscopic lung volume reduction), are established therapies in the treatment of end-stage chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients. Careful patient selection is crucial for each intervention. If these techniques are sequentially applied there is a paucity of available data and individual center experiences vary depending on details in selection criteria and operative technique. This review aims to summarize the published data with a focus on LuTX after LVRS. This review covers patient selection for LuTX and LVR, technical considerations, limitations and outcomes. Published literature was identified by systematic search on Medline and appropriate papers were reviewed. Seven case reports/series, 7 comparative observational studies and one multicenter database analysis incorporating a total of 284 patients with LuTX and LVR were evaluated. Prior LVR can significantly affect intraoperative and postoperative risks after subsequent LuTX. Careful patient selection and timing and the choice of appropriate techniques such as minimal invasive LVRS and using ECMO as extracorporeal support during LuTX if required can minimize those risks, ultimately leading to very good postoperative outcomes in terms of lung function and survival. LVRS has the potential to delay listing and to bridge patients to LuTX by improving their physical condition while on the waiting list. After single lung transplantation (SLuTX) contralateral LVRS can counteract the deleterious effects of native lung hyperinflation (NLH). LVR and LuTX are adjunct therapies in the treatment of end-stage COPD. The combination of both can safely be considered in selected patients.

Clinical management of lung volume reduction in end stage emphysema patients

Following the evaluation of surgical lung volume reduction (LVR) in the National Emphysema Treatment (NETT) trial, different endoscopic LVR procedures have been developed for severe emphysema. Among those, endobronchial valve placement is the best evaluated method. All these therapies aim at reducing hyperinflation and at improving respiratory mechanics. It has been shown that these procedures can improve quality of life, lung function and exercise capacity in a significant and clinically meaningful way in suitable patients. Optimal medical therapy, physical rehabilitation, smoking cessation and respiratory insufficiency assessments should been thoroughly evaluated by a multi-disciplinary team before considering any LVR procedure. Clinical experience is necessary to decide if a patient is an appropriate candidate for a surgical or an interventional LVR procedure, to choose the optimal treatment strategy and to provide a high-level of care after the intervention, particularly when complications such as pneumothorax or persistent air leak occur in this already severely ill patient population. High volume emphysema care centers, providing a broad spectrum of different LVR procedures and involving a multidisciplinary team in the diagnostic process, are best suited to provide an optimal outcome. The aim of this manuscript is to describe the structures and procedures required to achieve the best possible outcome even in patients with advanced stage of their emphysema disease, including patients who are candidates for lung transplantation.

New bacterial growth in bronchial secretions after bronchoscopic valve implantation

Background

Bronchoscopic valve implantation is an established treatment in selected patients with severe lung emphysema. There is evidence in literature of increased bacterial colonization of various implants. So far, it is unclear if an increased bacterial colonization can also be observed after endoscopic valve therapy.

Methods

Retrospective analysis of patients with examination of the bronchial secretions for presence or change of bacterial growth before and after valve implantation.

Results

Overall, 144 patients who underwent bronchoscopic follow-up after valve implantation were included in this analysis. Prior to valve placement, only 7 out of 144 consecutive emphysema patients (5%) presented with evidence of bacterial colonization, whereas 137 patients (95%) showed no bacterial growth prior to valve placement. One hundred seven out of the 137 patients (78%) showed new bacterial growth after valve implantation. Almost 38% of the patients who presented with a new bacterial growth had evidence of Viridans streptococci, Rothia mucilaginousa and Neisseria species simultaneously, as bacterial colonization. Pathogenic bacterial growth was recorded for Staphylococcus aureus (18%), Pseudomonas aeruginosa (13%) and Stenotrophomonas maltophilia (9%) microorganisms. There was also a significant bacterial growth by Moraxella catarrhalis (26%) and anaerobic bacteria (23%), especially in patients with complete atelectasis after successful endoscopic lung volume reduction. For all of the 7 patients, the presented initial bacterial colonization showed a change in the flora after bronchoscopy valve implantation.

Conclusion

In this study we observed an increased bacterial colonization in the long term after valve implantation. This finding needs further evaluation regarding its possible clinical relevance but should be taken into consideration in the follow-up of these patients.

Endoscopic Lung Volume Reduction Using Endobronchial Valves in Patients with Severe Emphysema and Very Low FEV1

BACKGROUND

Patients with a forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) below 20% of the predicted normal values (pred.) and either homogeneous emphysema or low diffusing capacity for carbon monoxide (DLCO) have a high risk for adverse events including death when undergoing surgical lung volume reduction.

OBJECTIVES

We hypothesized that selected patients can benefit from endoscopic lung volume reduction (eLVR) despite a very low FEV1.

METHODS

This study is a retrospective analysis of consecutive patients with severe airflow obstruction, an FEV1 ≤20% of pred., and low DLCO who were treated by eLVR with endobronchial valves (EBV) between June 2012 and January 2015. Pre- and postinterventional lung function parameters, the 6-min walking test (6-MWT) distance, adverse events, and follow-up were recorded.

RESULTS

In 20 patients, there was an overall improvement in lung function with an increase in FEV1 (16.97-21.03% of pred.) and a decrease in residual volume (322-270% of pred.) and total lung capacity (144-129.06% of pred.). The 6-MWT distance improved (from 239 ± 77 to 267± 97 m overall, and from 184 ± 50 to 237 ± 101 m if patients developed an atelectasis of the target lobe). Pneumothorax occurred in 5 of the 20 patients (25%). 30-day mortality was 0%, and all patients survived to discharge.

CONCLUSIONS

The patients benefitted moderately from EBV treatment despite an initially low FEV1. Some patients improved remarkably. EBV treatment in patients with an FEV1 ≤20% of pred. is generally feasible and safe. The greatest risk is pneumothorax with prolonged chest tube duration.

Recurrent Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Exacerbations after Endobronchial Valve Implantation Are Associated with the Presence of Pseudomonas aeruginosa

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic lung volume reduction by means of endobronchial valve implantation is an established therapy in patients with severe emphysema. However, long-term complications such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exacerbations are a limitation of this method.

OBJECTIVES

As the mechanisms underlying increased rates of COPD exacerbations are unknown, the aim of our study was to determine whether infectious or inflammatory factors may contribute to these events and to investingate the consequent need for valve explantation.

METHODS

Tissue surrounding explanted endobronchial Zephyr valves was examined by microbiological, histological and cytological methods. Additionally, we performed a microbiological analysis of tracheal aspirates before both valve implantation and valve explantation. Moreover, blood samples were collected for the analysis of inflammatory markers.

RESULTS

Endobronchial valves were explanted from 16 patients. Reasons for explantation were frequent postprocedural COPD exacerbations (group 1: 8 patients) or loss of clinical benefit (group 2: 8 patients). Compared to group 2, the microbiological examinations of valve lavage and tracheal aspirates from patients in group 1 showed a higher detection of Gram-negative bacteria. In particular, infection with Pseudomonas aeruginosa was more predominant in group 1, while no presence could be detected in group 2. Blood inflammatory markers tended to be slightly higher in group 1 than in group 2; however, without reaching statistical significance.

CONCLUSIONS

Increased rates of COPD exacerbations after endobronchial valve implantation are associated with the presence of P. aeruginosa. The finding warrants further investigation.

Lung transplantation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: patient selection and special considerations

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a leading cause of mortality and morbidity. Lung transplantation is one of the few treatments available for end-stage COPD with the potential to improve survival and quality of life. The selection of candidates and timing of listing present challenges, as COPD tends to progress fairly slowly, and survival after lung transplantation remains limited. Though the natural course of COPD is difficult to predict, the use of assessments of functional status and multivariable indices such as the BODE index can help identify which patients with COPD are at increased risk for mortality, and hence which are more likely to benefit from lung transplantation. Patients with COPD can undergo either single or bilateral lung transplantation. Although many studies suggest better long-term survival with bilateral lung transplant, especially in younger patients, this continues to be debated, and definitive recommendations about this cannot be made. Patients may be more susceptible to particular complications of transplant for COPD, including native lung hyperinflation, and development of lung cancer.