Literature DB >> 25734735

Single- vs double-lung transplantation in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis since the implementation of lung allocation based on medical need.

Justin M Schaffer1, Steve K Singh2, Bruce A Reitz1, Roham T Zamanian3, Hari R Mallidi2.   

Abstract

IMPORTANCE: Outcomes of single- and double-lung transplantation have not been rigorously assessed since the allocation of donor lungs according to medical need as quantified by the Lung Allocation Score, which began in 2005.
OBJECTIVE: To compare outcomes in single- and double-lung transplant recipients since the Lung Allocation Score was implemented. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: In this exploratory analysis, adults with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) who underwent lung transplantation in the United States between May 4, 2005, and December 31, 2012, were identified in the United Network for Organ Sharing thoracic registry, with follow-up to December 31, 2012. Posttransplantation graft survival was assessed with Kaplan-Meier analysis. Propensity scores were used to control for treatment selection bias. A multivariable flexible parametric prognostic model was used to characterize the time-varying hazard associated with single- vs double-lung transplantation. EXPOSURE: Single- or double-lung transplantation. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Composite of posttransplant death and graft failure (retransplantation).
RESULTS: Patients with IPF (n = 4134, of whom 2010 underwent single-lung and 2124 underwent double-lung transplantation) or COPD (n = 3174, of whom 1299 underwent single-lung and 1875 underwent double-lung transplantation) were identified as having undergone lung transplantation since May 2005. Median follow-up was 23.5 months. Of the patients with IPF, 1380 (33.4%) died and 115 (2.8%) underwent retransplantation; of the patients with COPD, 1138 (34.0%) died and 59 (1.9%) underwent retransplantation. After confounders were controlled for with propensity score analysis, double-lung transplants were associated with better graft survival in patients with IPF (adjusted median survival, 65.2 months [interquartile range {IQR}, 21.4-91.3 months] vs 50.4 months [IQR, 17.0-87.5 months]; P < .001) but not in patients with COPD (adjusted median survival, 67.7 months [IQR, 25.2-89.6 months] vs 64.0 months [IQR, 25.2-88.7 months]; P = .23). The interaction between diagnosis type (COPD or IPF) and graft failure was significant (P = .049). Double-lung transplants had a time-varying association with graft survival; a decreased instantaneous late hazard for death or graft failure among patients with IPF was noted at 1 year and persisted at 5 years postoperatively (instantaneous hazard at 5 years, hazard ratio, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.52-0.84] in patients with IPF and 0.89 [95% CI, 0.71-1.13] in patients with COPD). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In an exploratory analysis of registry data since implementation of a medical need-based lung allocation system, double-lung transplantation was associated with better graft survival than single-lung transplantation in patients with IPF. In patients with COPD, there was no survival difference between single- and double-lung transplant recipients at 5 years.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25734735     DOI: 10.1001/jama.2015.1175

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA        ISSN: 0098-7484            Impact factor:   56.272


  36 in total

Review 1.  Recommendations for the management of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis in South Africa: a position statement of the South African Thoracic Society.

Authors:  Coenraad F N Koegelenberg; Gillian M Ainslie; Keertan Dheda; Brian W Allwood; Michelle L Wong; Umesh G Lalloo; Mohamed S Abdool-Gaffar; Hoosain Khalfey; Elvis M Irusen
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2016-12       Impact factor: 2.895

2.  Which Shall I Choose? Lung Transplantation Listing Preference for Individuals with Interstitial Lung Disease and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.

Authors:  Kathleen J Ramos; Michael O Harhay; Michael S Mulligan
Journal:  Ann Am Thorac Soc       Date:  2019-02

Review 3.  Bilateral versus single lung transplantation: are two lungs better than one?

Authors:  Melanie P Subramanian; Bryan F Meyers
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2018-07       Impact factor: 2.895

4.  Procedure Preference and Intention-to-Treat Outcomes after Listing for Lung Transplantation among U.S. Adults. A Cohort Study.

Authors:  Michaela R Anderson; Ashley Tabah; Arindam RoyChoudhury; David J Lederer
Journal:  Ann Am Thorac Soc       Date:  2019-02

5.  Longer Life or More Life: Choose One Please.

Authors:  Barbara C Cahill; Sanjeev Raman; John R Stringham; Stephen H McKellar; Craig H Selzman; Theodore G Liou
Journal:  J Surg Res       Date:  2018-09-05       Impact factor: 2.192

6.  Effect of Transplant Center Volume on Cost and Readmissions in Medicare Lung Transplant Recipients.

Authors:  Joshua J Mooney; David Weill; Jack H Boyd; Mark R Nicolls; Jay Bhattacharya; Gundeep S Dhillon
Journal:  Ann Am Thorac Soc       Date:  2016-07

7.  Gender differences in long-term survival post-transplant: A single-institution analysis in the lung allocation score era.

Authors:  Gabriel Loor; Roland Brown; Rosemary F Kelly; Kyle D Rudser; Sara J Shumway; Irena Cich; Christopher T Holley; Colleen Quinlan; Marshall I Hertz
Journal:  Clin Transplant       Date:  2017-02-08       Impact factor: 2.863

Review 8.  Outcomes after lung transplantation.

Authors:  Gabriel Thabut; Herve Mal
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2017-08       Impact factor: 2.895

Review 9.  Lung transplantation for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: past, present, and future directions.

Authors:  Faisal M Siddiqui; Joshua M Diamond
Journal:  Curr Opin Pulm Med       Date:  2018-03       Impact factor: 3.155

Review 10.  Transplant options for end stage chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in the context of multidisciplinary treatments.

Authors:  Luigi Santambrogio; Paolo Tarsia; Paolo Mendogni; Davide Tosi
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2018-10       Impact factor: 2.895

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.