INTRODUCTION: The feasibility and utility of a lung donor score that has been recently proposed was tested among a pool of lung donors referred to the Nord Italia Transplant program (NITp) organ procurement organization. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Each lung donor was assigned an Oto score including, age, smoking history, chest X-ray, secretions and ratio of arterial oxygen tension to inspired oxygen fraction (PaO(2)/FiO(2)). Based on clinical compromise, each variable received a score between 0 and 3, except for PaO(2)/FiO(2), which was scored between 0 and 6 given its overall relevance. RESULTS: Throughout 2010, 201 multiorgan donors were initially considered to be potential lung donors. Among these, 59 (29.4%) eventually yielded 67 lung transplantations (named "Used group"). Among the 142 (70.6%) refused lungs, 28 were not used due to logistic or medical problems ("general exclusion" group, GE) and 114, because of poor lung function ("lung exclusion" group, LE). Median lung donor scores were 1 (range, 0 to 3), 4 (range, 2.5 to 6.5), and 7 (range, 5 to 9) in the Used, GE, and LE groups, respectively (one-way analysis of variance, P < .001). Some donors with Oto scores ≤7 worsened over time so that the score had significantly increased by the time of organ retrieval. Overall, subjects who died after lung transplantation were characterized by higher lung donor scores, (2 [1-4] versus 0.5 [0-3], P = .003). CONCLUSION: Our analysis suggested that the use of a donor score as a dynamic tool over the donation process was of great utility to describe and analyze a pool of lung donors.
INTRODUCTION: The feasibility and utility of a lung donor score that has been recently proposed was tested among a pool of lung donors referred to the Nord Italia Transplant program (NITp) organ procurement organization. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Each lung donor was assigned an Oto score including, age, smoking history, chest X-ray, secretions and ratio of arterial oxygen tension to inspired oxygen fraction (PaO(2)/FiO(2)). Based on clinical compromise, each variable received a score between 0 and 3, except for PaO(2)/FiO(2), which was scored between 0 and 6 given its overall relevance. RESULTS: Throughout 2010, 201 multiorgan donors were initially considered to be potential lung donors. Among these, 59 (29.4%) eventually yielded 67 lung transplantations (named "Used group"). Among the 142 (70.6%) refused lungs, 28 were not used due to logistic or medical problems ("general exclusion" group, GE) and 114, because of poor lung function ("lung exclusion" group, LE). Median lung donor scores were 1 (range, 0 to 3), 4 (range, 2.5 to 6.5), and 7 (range, 5 to 9) in the Used, GE, and LE groups, respectively (one-way analysis of variance, P < .001). Some donors with Oto scores ≤7 worsened over time so that the score had significantly increased by the time of organ retrieval. Overall, subjects who died after lung transplantation were characterized by higher lung donor scores, (2 [1-4] versus 0.5 [0-3], P = .003). CONCLUSION: Our analysis suggested that the use of a donor score as a dynamic tool over the donation process was of great utility to describe and analyze a pool of lung donors.
Authors: Jacqueline M Smits; Jens Gottlieb; Erik Verschuuren; Patrick Evrard; Rogier Hoek; Christiane Knoop; György Lang; Johanna M Kwakkel-van Erp; Robin Vos; Geert Verleden; Benoit Rondelet; Daniel Hoefer; Frank Langer; Rene Schramm; Konrad Hoetzenecker; Diana van Kessel; Bart Luijk; Leonard Seghers; Tobias Deuse; Roland Buhl; Christian Witt; Agita Strelniece; Dave Green; Erwin de Vries; Guenter Laufer; Dirk Van Raemdonck Journal: Transpl Int Date: 2020-02-13 Impact factor: 3.782