Incidence, Risk Factors and Sequelae of Dysphagia Mediated Aspiration Following Lung Transplantation

Gastrointestinal complications in pediatric lung transplant recipients: Incidence, risk factors, and effects on patient outcomes

BACKGROUND

Gastrointestinal (GI) complications in lung transplant recipients can occur any time during the post-operative period, leading to prolonged morbidity and mortality. Despite the negative association between GI complications and patient outcomes, little is known about their incidence and risk factors for their development in pediatric lung transplant recipients.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective chart review at one pediatric tertiary center to describe the frequency of GI complications in lung transplant recipients. We identified potential risk factors for the diagnosis of gastroparesis, gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and aspiration in the post-transplant period. Lastly, we investigated the association of these complications with mortality and graft survival.

RESULTS

84.3% of lung transplant recipients experienced at least one GI complication in the post-transplant period. Gastroparesis (52.9%), GERD (41.2%), and oropharyngeal dysphagia/laryngeal penetration (33.3%) were the most common complications diagnosed. Post-operative opioid exposure was a risk factor for gastroparesis, with the odds increasing 3.0% each day a patient was prescribed opioids (p = .021). The risk of death or retransplant in individuals who experienced gastroparesis was 2.7 times higher than those not diagnosed with gastroparesis (p = .027).

CONCLUSION

Exposure to opioids in the post-operative period is a risk factor for gastroparesis and a prolonged hospitalization placed patients at risk for aspiration. Gastroparesis was associated with increased patient mortality and graft failure, while aspiration and GERD had no effect on long term outcomes. Future prospective studies investigating the relationship between opioid use and the development of a gastroparesis are necessary to improve patient outcomes.

Impact of gastro-jejunostomy tube in lung transplant patients: a propensity-matched analysis

OBJECTIVES

During the postoperative phase of lung transplantation, the surgical creation of a gastro-jejunostomy (GJ) may be deemed necessary for patients with severe oesophageal dysmotility, prolonged oral intake difficulties stemming from use of a ventilator or marked malnutrition. We explored the effects of postoperative GJ tube on survival and bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome in lung transplant recipients.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed all lung transplants performed at our institution between 2011 and 2022. Propensity score matching was performed to match patients who required a GJ tube with control patients on a 1:1 ratio. The preoperative, operative and postoperative outcomes of the patients were evaluated.

RESULTS

After propensity score matching, 193 patients with GJ were compared to 193 patients without GJ. Patients with GJ had significantly higher rates of delayed chest closure (P = 0.007), and postoperative dialysis (P = 0.016), longer intensive care unit stays (P < 0.001), longer ventilator duration (P < 0.001), higher rates of pneumonia (P = 0.035) and higher rates of being treated for acute cellular rejection within 1 year of transplant (P = 0.008). Overall survival and freedom from bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome were not found to be significantly different between the matched groups (P = 0.09 and P = 0.3).

CONCLUSIONS

GJ tube placement during the postoperative phase of lung transplantation did not compromise patient survival or freedom from bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome although the results reflect more difficult and complicated cases. This study indicates that the GJ tube may be a useful option for enteral feeding.

Characterizing Swallowing Impairment in a Post-Lung Transplant Population

BACKGROUND

Lung transplant recipients carry significant pre- and post-lung transplant dysphagia risk factors related to altered respiratory-swallow coordination as well as acute injury and decompensation resulting in the acute post-lung transplant recovery period. However, we are only beginning to understand the potential physiological contributors to altered swallowing in this population.

METHOD

A retrospective, cross-sectional, cohort study of post-lung transplant patients was performed. All participants received a modified barium swallow study (MBSS) as part of standard care during their acute hospitalization using the Modified Barium Swallow Impairment Profile (MBSImP) protocol and scoring metric. A combination of MBSImP scores, Penetration-Aspiration Scale (PAS) scores, Functional Oral Intake Scale (FOIS) scores, International Dysphagia Diet Standardization Initiative (IDDSI) scale levels, and the time from lung transplant to MBSS was collected, as well as measures of swallowing impairment and swallowing-related outcomes. Differences in swallowing physiology and swallowing-related outcomes between participants with typical versus atypical PAS were explored.

RESULTS

Forty-two participants met our prespecified inclusion criteria. We identified atypical laryngeal penetration and/or aspiration in 52.4% of our post-lung transplant cohort. Silent aspiration occurred in 75% of those patients who aspirated. Comparing typical versus atypical PAS scores, we found statistically significant associations with laryngeal elevation (Component 8), p < .0001; anterior hyoid excursion (Component 9), p = .0046; epiglottic movement (Component 10), p = .0031; laryngeal vestibule closure (Component 11), p < .0001; pharyngeal stripping (Component 12), p = .0058; pharyngeal total scores, p = .0001; FOIS scores, p = .00264; and IDDSI liquid levels, p = .0009.

CONCLUSIONS

Swallowing impairment resulting in abnormal bolus invasion is prevalent in post-lung transplant patients. Airway invasion in this cohort was related to pharyngeal swallow impairment and resulted in modified oral intake. Our findings help expand upon prior literature, which only reported the incidence of aspiration and pathological laryngeal penetration. Our results suggest that the potential for aerodigestive system impairment and negative sequela should not be underestimated in the post-lung transplant population.

A prospective examination of swallow and cough dysfunction after lung transplantation

OBJECTIVES

Swallow and cough dysfunction are possible surgical complications of lung transplantation (LT). We examined voluntary cough strength, sensorimotor reflexive cough integrity, and swallow-related respiratory rate (RR) across swallowing safety and aspiration response groups in recovering LT recipients.

METHODS

Forty-five LT recipients underwent flexible endoscopic evaluation of swallowing indexed by the validated Penetration Aspiration Scale. RR before and after a 3-ounce water drinking task was measured. Voluntary and reflexive cough screening were performed to index motor and sensory outcomes. T-tests, one-way ANOVAs, and chi-square (odds ratios) were used.

RESULTS

60% of patients exhibited laryngeal penetration (n = 27) and 40% demonstrated tracheal aspiration (n = 18); 72% (n = 13) demonstrated silent aspiration. Baseline RR was higher in aspirators versus non-aspirators (26.5 vs. 22.6, p = 0.04) and in silent aspirators compared to non-silent aspirators (27.9 vs. 20.7, p = 0.01). RR change post-swallowing did not differ between aspiration response groups; however, it was significantly higher in aspirators compared to non-aspirators (3 vs. -2, p = 0.02). Compared to non-silent aspirators, silent aspirators demonstrated reduced voluntary cough peak expiratory flow (PEF; 166 vs. 324 L/min, p = 0.01). PEF, motor and urge to cough reflex cough ratings did not differ between aspirators and non-aspirators. Silent aspirators demonstrated a 7.5 times higher odds of failing reflex cough screening compared to non-silent aspirators (p = 0.07).

CONCLUSIONS

During the acute recovery period, all LT participants demonstrated some degree of unsafe swallowing and reduced voluntary cough strength. Silent aspirators exhibited elevated RR, reduced voluntary cough physiologic capacity to defend the airway, and a clinically distinguishable blunted motor response to reflex cough screening.