Konrad Hoetzenecker1, Laura Donahoe2, Jonathan C Yeung2, Sassan Azad2, Eddy Fan3, Niall D Ferguson3, Lorenzo Del Sorbo3, Marc de Perrot2, Andrew Pierre2, Kazuhiro Yasufuku2, Lianne Singer2, Thomas K Waddell2, Shaf Keshavjee2, Marcelo Cypel4. 1. Toronto Lung Transplant Program, Toronto General Hospital, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Department of Thoracic Surgery, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria. 2. Toronto Lung Transplant Program, Toronto General Hospital, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 3. Division of Critical Care Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 4. Toronto Lung Transplant Program, Toronto General Hospital, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Electronic address: marcelo.cypel@uhn.ca.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Extracorporeal life support (ECLS) is increasingly used to bridge deteriorating patients awaiting lung transplantation (LTx), however, few systematic descriptions of this practice exist. We therefore aimed to review our institutional experience over the past 10 years. METHODS: In this case series, we included all adults who received ECLS with the intent to bridge to LTx. Data were retrieved from patient charts and our institutional ECLS and transplant databases. RESULTS: Between January 2006 and September 2016, 1111 LTx were performed in our institution. ECLS was used in 71 adults with the intention to bridge to LTx; of these, 11 (16%) were bridged to retransplantation. The median duration of ECLS before LTx was 10 days (range, 0-95). We used a single dual-lumen venous cannula in 23 patients (32%). Nine of 13 patients (69%) with pulmonary hypertension were bridged by central pulmonary artery to left atrium Novalung. Twenty-five patients (35%) were extubated while on ECLS and 26 patients (37%) were mobilized. Sixty-three patients (89%) survived to LTx. Survival by intention to treat was 66% (1 year), 58% (3 years) and 48% (5 years). Survival was significantly shorter in patients undergoing ECLS bridge to retransplantation compared with first LTx (median survival, 15 months (95% CI, 0-31) versus 60 months (95% CI, 37-83); P = .041). CONCLUSIONS: In our center experience, ECLS bridge to first lung transplant leads to good short-term and long-term outcomes in carefully selected patients. In contrast, our data suggest that ECLS as a bridge to retransplantation should be used with caution.
OBJECTIVES: Extracorporeal life support (ECLS) is increasingly used to bridge deteriorating patients awaiting lung transplantation (LTx), however, few systematic descriptions of this practice exist. We therefore aimed to review our institutional experience over the past 10 years. METHODS: In this case series, we included all adults who received ECLS with the intent to bridge to LTx. Data were retrieved from patient charts and our institutional ECLS and transplant databases. RESULTS: Between January 2006 and September 2016, 1111 LTx were performed in our institution. ECLS was used in 71 adults with the intention to bridge to LTx; of these, 11 (16%) were bridged to retransplantation. The median duration of ECLS before LTx was 10 days (range, 0-95). We used a single dual-lumen venous cannula in 23 patients (32%). Nine of 13 patients (69%) with pulmonary hypertension were bridged by central pulmonary artery to left atrium Novalung. Twenty-five patients (35%) were extubated while on ECLS and 26 patients (37%) were mobilized. Sixty-three patients (89%) survived to LTx. Survival by intention to treat was 66% (1 year), 58% (3 years) and 48% (5 years). Survival was significantly shorter in patients undergoing ECLS bridge to retransplantation compared with first LTx (median survival, 15 months (95% CI, 0-31) versus 60 months (95% CI, 37-83); P = .041). CONCLUSIONS: In our center experience, ECLS bridge to first lung transplant leads to good short-term and long-term outcomes in carefully selected patients. In contrast, our data suggest that ECLS as a bridge to retransplantation should be used with caution.
Authors: Lorriana E Leard; Are M Holm; Maryam Valapour; Allan R Glanville; Sandeep Attawar; Meghan Aversa; Silvia V Campos; Lillian M Christon; Marcelo Cypel; Göran Dellgren; Matthew G Hartwig; Siddhartha G Kapnadak; Nicholas A Kolaitis; Robert M Kotloff; Caroline M Patterson; Oksana A Shlobin; Patrick J Smith; Amparo Solé; Melinda Solomon; David Weill; Marlies S Wijsenbeek; Brigitte W M Willemse; Selim M Arcasoy; Kathleen J Ramos Journal: J Heart Lung Transplant Date: 2021-07-24 Impact factor: 13.569
Authors: Jeremiah William Awori Hayanga; Heather K Hayanga; James H Fugett; Kelsey A Musgrove; Ghulam Abbas; Christopher R Ensor; Vinay Badhwar; Norihisa Shigemura Journal: Transpl Int Date: 2020-05-12 Impact factor: 3.782
Authors: Nicholas A Kolaitis; Allison Soong; Pavan Shrestha; Hanjing Zhuo; John Neuhaus; Patti P Katz; John R Greenland; Jeffrey Golden; Lorriana E Leard; Rupal J Shah; Steven R Hays; Jasleen Kukreja; Mary Ellen Kleinhenz; Paul D Blanc; Jonathan P Singer Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2018-02-22 Impact factor: 5.209
Authors: Marius M Hoeper; Raymond L Benza; Paul Corris; Marc de Perrot; Elie Fadel; Anne M Keogh; Christian Kühn; Laurent Savale; Walter Klepetko Journal: Eur Respir J Date: 2019-01-24 Impact factor: 16.671
Authors: Darya Rudym; Luke Benvenuto; Joseph Costa; Meghan Aversa; Hilary Robbins; Lori Shah; Hanyoung Kim; Bryan P Stanifer; Joshua Sonett; Frank D'Ovidio; Selim M Arcasoy Journal: Ann Transplant Date: 2020-08-18 Impact factor: 1.530
Authors: Christian Lang; Peter Jaksch; Mir Alireza Hoda; György Lang; Thomas Staudinger; Edda Tschernko; Bernhard Zapletal; Silvana Geleff; Helmut Prosch; Riem Gawish; Sylvia Knapp; Oliver Robak; Florian Thalhammer; Alexander Indra; Markus Koestenberger; Robert Strassl; Thomas Klikovits; Kamran Ali; Gottfried Fischer; Walter Klepetko; Konrad Hoetzenecker; Peter Schellongowski Journal: Lancet Respir Med Date: 2020-08-25 Impact factor: 30.700