Mohan M John1, Wendy Shih2, Dennys Estevez2, Timothy P Martens1, Leonard L Bailey1, Anees J Razzouk1, David G Rabkin3. 1. Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Loma Linda University Medical Center, Loma Linda, California. 2. Research Consulting Group, School of Public Health, Loma Linda University Medical Center, Loma Linda, California. 3. Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Loma Linda University Medical Center, Loma Linda, California. Electronic address: drabkin@llu.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We examined the effect of cold ischemic interval on modern outcomes to determine whether advances in patient management have made an impact. METHODS: Using the United Network of Organ Sharing database, we reviewed adult heart transplants between January 2000 and March 2016. We divided donor age into terciles: younger than 18 years, 18 to 33 years, and 34 years and older. Within each tercile, transplants were divided by cold ischemic interval of less than 4 hours, 4 to 6 hours, and more than 6 hours. Survival curves were compared between cold ischemic interval categories within each tercile. Covariate-adjusted and donor age-stratified Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to estimate overall mortality and graft failure hazards ratios. RESULTS: Of 29,192 transplants, no significant differences between cold ischemic interval groups in survival or graft failure were apparent in the group aged younger than 18. For donors older than 18, significant differences were found for survival and graft failure with cold ischemic interval exceeding 4 hours in both univariate and multivariate analysis, and survival functions at different ischemic intervals continued to diverge beyond 1 year. The interaction effect between donor age and cold ischemic interval on overall mortality was not significant when analyzed as continuous variables, however younger donor age appeared to attenuate increase in overall mortality with longer cold ischemic intervals. CONCLUSIONS: Despite advances in perioperative management during the past 30 years, for donors older than 18 years, cold ischemic interval exceeding 4 hours is associated with gradual but significantly diminished survival that persists well beyond the perioperative period. Comparison to historical data suggests that advances in management have somewhat attenuated the hazard associated with longer ischemic times.
BACKGROUND: We examined the effect of cold ischemic interval on modern outcomes to determine whether advances in patient management have made an impact. METHODS: Using the United Network of Organ Sharing database, we reviewed adult heart transplants between January 2000 and March 2016. We divided donor age into terciles: younger than 18 years, 18 to 33 years, and 34 years and older. Within each tercile, transplants were divided by cold ischemic interval of less than 4 hours, 4 to 6 hours, and more than 6 hours. Survival curves were compared between cold ischemic interval categories within each tercile. Covariate-adjusted and donor age-stratified Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to estimate overall mortality and graft failure hazards ratios. RESULTS: Of 29,192 transplants, no significant differences between cold ischemic interval groups in survival or graft failure were apparent in the group aged younger than 18. For donors older than 18, significant differences were found for survival and graft failure with cold ischemic interval exceeding 4 hours in both univariate and multivariate analysis, and survival functions at different ischemic intervals continued to diverge beyond 1 year. The interaction effect between donor age and cold ischemic interval on overall mortality was not significant when analyzed as continuous variables, however younger donor age appeared to attenuate increase in overall mortality with longer cold ischemic intervals. CONCLUSIONS: Despite advances in perioperative management during the past 30 years, for donors older than 18 years, cold ischemic interval exceeding 4 hours is associated with gradual but significantly diminished survival that persists well beyond the perioperative period. Comparison to historical data suggests that advances in management have somewhat attenuated the hazard associated with longer ischemic times.
Authors: Kiran K Khush; Luciano Potena; Wida S Cherikh; Daniel C Chambers; Michael O Harhay; Don Hayes; Eileen Hsich; Aparna Sadavarte; Tajinder P Singh; Andreas Zuckermann; Josef Stehlik Journal: J Heart Lung Transplant Date: 2020-07-23 Impact factor: 10.247
Authors: Paul C Tang; Xiaoting Wu; Min Zhang; Donald Likosky; Jonathan W Haft; Ienglam Lei; Ashraf Abou El Ela; Ming-Sing Si; Keith D Aaronson; Francis D Pagani Journal: J Card Surg Date: 2022-04-30 Impact factor: 1.778