Use of Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Prior to Lung Transplantation Does Not Jeopardize Short-term Survival

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation as a bridge vs. non-bridging for lung transplantation: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Whether extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) as a bridge to lung transplantation (BTT) can achieve a similar survival to non-BTT remains controversial. We conducted this meta-analysis to compare the outcomes between ECMO BTT and non-BTT to facilitate better clinical decision-making. Seven databases were searched for eligible studies comparing ECMO BTT and non-BTT. The primary endpoints included survival, intraoperative indicators, postoperative hospitalization indicators, and postoperative complications. Nineteen studies (involving 7061 participants) were included in the final analysis. The outcomes of overall survival, overall survival rate, graft survival rate, in-hospital mortality, postoperative hospital days, postoperative intensive care unit days, postoperative ventilation time, blood transfusion volume, and postoperative complications were all better in the non-BTT group. The total mortality in ECMO bridging was 23.03%, in which the top five causes of death were right heart failure (8.03%), multiple organ failure (7.03%), bleeding (not cranial) (4.67%), cranial bleeding (3.15%), and sepsis (2.90%). In summary, Non-BTT is associated with better survival and fewer complications compared to BTT. When ECMO may be the only option, the patient and medical team need to realize the increased risk of ECMO by complications and survival.

The lung allocation score could evaluate allocation systems in countries that do not use the score

BACKGROUND

Evaluating allocation system effects on lung transplantation and determining systemic flaws is difficult. The purpose of this study was to assess the Korean urgency-based lung allocation system using the lung allocation score.

METHODS

We reviewed transplantation patients retrospectively. Candidates were classified into groups based on urgency. Status 0 designated hospitalized patients requiring ventilator and/or extracorporeal life support. The lung allocation score was calculated based on the recipient's condition at transplantation.

RESULTS

One-hundred-twenty-three Status 0, 1, and 2/3 patients (40, 71, and 12, respectively) were enrolled. The median waiting time was 68 days. Nineteen Status 0 patients who received lung transplants deteriorated from non-Status 0 (median, 64 days). The lung allocation score showed a bimodal distribution (peaks around 45 and 90, corresponding with non-Status 0 and Status 0, respectively). Status 0 and the lung allocation score were independent risk factors for poor survival after adjustment for confounders (Status 0, hazard ratio, 2.788, p = 0.001; lung allocation score, hazard ratio, 1.025, p < 0.001). The lung allocation score cut-off for survival was 44. On dividing the non-Status 0 patients into 2 groups using the cut-off values and regrouping into Status 0, non-Status 0 with high lung allocation score (> 44), and non-Status 0 with low lung allocation score (< 44), we observed that non-Status 0 with high lung allocation score patients had better survival than Status 0 patients (p = 0.020) and poorer survival than non-Status 0 with low lung allocation score patients (p = 0.018).

CONCLUSIONS

The LAS demonstrated the characteristics of LTx recipients in Korea and the Korean allocation system needs to be revised to reduce the number of patients receiving LTx in Status 0. The LAS system could be used as a tool to evaluate lung allocation systems in countries that do not use the LAS system.

Extracorporeal Life Support as a Bridge to Lung Transplantation in Patients With Acute Respiratory Failure

BACKGROUND

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is being used more often as a bridge to transplantation (BTT) in patients with acutely decompensated end-stage lung disease in Korea. ECMO as a BTT may be the only rescue strategy for severe acute respiratory failure, but many centers still consider it to be a relative contraindication to lung transplantation because of its poor outcome. Because there are not enough lung donors, it is important to determine their optimal use. We reviewed and analyzed our experiences with the use of ECMO as a BTT in patients with acute respiratory failure.

METHODS

This was a retrospective analysis of all patients with acutely decompensated end-stage lung disease treated with ECMO as a bridge to lung transplantation between March 2012 and February 2016.

RESULTS

Of the 194 patients who underwent respiratory ECMO over a 4-year period, a BTT strategy was used for 19 patients (median age, 58 years) on our institution's lung transplantation waiting list (15 veno-venous, 3 veno-veno-arterial, 1 veno-arterial). Fourteen patients (73.7%) were successfully bridged to transplantation; however, 3 died while on the waiting list and 2 returned to their baseline functions without transplantation. The overall in-hospital survival rate was 57.9% (11 of 19), including the 9 (64.3%) patients who underwent transplantation.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings support the view that well-selected candidates with acutely decompensated end-stage lung disease may be safely bridged until a suitable donor is identified. ECMO is not able to reverse the course of patients; however, it could be a life-saving option for patients with acute respiratory failure requiring lung transplantation.

Selection of Patients for Initial Clinical Trials of Solid Organ Xenotransplantation

Several groups have reported extended survival of genetically engineered pig organs in nonhuman primates, varying from almost 10 months for life-supporting kidney grafts and more than 2 years for non-life-supporting heart grafts to less than 1 month for life-supporting liver and lung grafts. We have attempted to define groups of patients who may not have an option to wait for an allograft. These include kidney, heart, and lung candidates who are highly-allosensitized. In addition, some kidney candidates (who have previously lost at least 2 allografts from rapid recurrence of native kidney disease) have a high risk of further recurrence and will not be offered a repeat allotransplant. Patients with complex congenital heart disease, who may have undergone previous palliative surgical procedures, may be unsuitable for ventricular assist device implantation. Patients dying of fulminant hepatic failure, for whom no alternative therapy is available, may be candidates for a pig liver, even if only as a bridge until an allograft becomes available. When the results of pig organ xenotransplantation in nonhuman primates suggest a realistic potential for success of a pilot clinical trial, highly selected patients should be offered participation.