Outcomes of Donation After Circulatory Death Lung Transplantation in the United States Based on Procurement Strategies: A United Network for Organ Sharing Analysis.

IF 4.9 2区 医学 Q1 IMMUNOLOGY
Transplantation Pub Date : 2026-10-01 Epub Date: 2026-06-17 DOI:10.1097/TP.0000000000005803
Ervin Y Cui, Doug A Gouchoe, Divyaam Satija, Martin G Walsh, Aaron Gou, Ammu V Alvarez, Matthew C Henn, Asvin M Ganapathi, Kukbin Choi, Bryan A Whitson
{"title":"Outcomes of Donation After Circulatory Death Lung Transplantation in the United States Based on Procurement Strategies: A United Network for Organ Sharing Analysis.","authors":"Ervin Y Cui, Doug A Gouchoe, Divyaam Satija, Martin G Walsh, Aaron Gou, Ammu V Alvarez, Matthew C Henn, Asvin M Ganapathi, Kukbin Choi, Bryan A Whitson","doi":"10.1097/TP.0000000000005803","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Donation after circulatory death (DCD) is increasingly utilized to expand the donor pool. Within DCD, direct procurement and perfusion (DPP) and thoracoabdominal normothermic regional perfusion (TA-NRP) have emerged as distinct procurement strategies. Yet, outcomes remain unclear especially in combination with ex vivo lung perfusion (EVLP).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The United Network for Organ Sharing database was queried for adult lung transplants performed between December 2019 and March 2025. Recipients were stratified as donation after brain death (DBD), DCD DPP, or DCD TA-NRP. Propensity score matching was performed for DBD versus DCD, DBD versus DPP, DBD versus TA-NRP, and DPP versus TA-NRP comparisons. Additional analyses included DBD versus DCD EVLP subgroups. Outcomes included perioperative morbidity, primary graft dysfunction grade 3 (PGD3), and survival.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>DCD recipients demonstrated increased perioperative morbidity including longer hospitalization (22 versus 19 d, P < 0.001), greater postoperative ECMO use (15.2% versus 8.1%, P < 0.001), and higher PGD3 incidence (25.6% versus 15.6%, P < 0.001) compared with DBD, though survival was similar ( P = 0.74). TA-NRP and DPP lungs had comparable outcomes, with TA-NRP showing slightly lower perioperative morbidity. Among EVLP recipients, DCD EVLP lungs were associated with longer hospitalization (26 versus 20 d, P < 0.001), higher ECMO use (19.2% versus 10.1%, P = 0.004), and a trend toward lower survival, though not statistically significant.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>DCD lungs yield survival comparable to DBD despite greater perioperative morbidity. NRP procurement may mitigate morbidity relative to DPP. Incorporating NRP into DCD practice may enhance lung utilization while maintaining acceptable outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":23316,"journal":{"name":"Transplantation","volume":" ","pages":"e2122-e2134"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transplantation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/TP.0000000000005803","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/6/17 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"IMMUNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Donation after circulatory death (DCD) is increasingly utilized to expand the donor pool. Within DCD, direct procurement and perfusion (DPP) and thoracoabdominal normothermic regional perfusion (TA-NRP) have emerged as distinct procurement strategies. Yet, outcomes remain unclear especially in combination with ex vivo lung perfusion (EVLP).

Methods: The United Network for Organ Sharing database was queried for adult lung transplants performed between December 2019 and March 2025. Recipients were stratified as donation after brain death (DBD), DCD DPP, or DCD TA-NRP. Propensity score matching was performed for DBD versus DCD, DBD versus DPP, DBD versus TA-NRP, and DPP versus TA-NRP comparisons. Additional analyses included DBD versus DCD EVLP subgroups. Outcomes included perioperative morbidity, primary graft dysfunction grade 3 (PGD3), and survival.

Results: DCD recipients demonstrated increased perioperative morbidity including longer hospitalization (22 versus 19 d, P < 0.001), greater postoperative ECMO use (15.2% versus 8.1%, P < 0.001), and higher PGD3 incidence (25.6% versus 15.6%, P < 0.001) compared with DBD, though survival was similar ( P = 0.74). TA-NRP and DPP lungs had comparable outcomes, with TA-NRP showing slightly lower perioperative morbidity. Among EVLP recipients, DCD EVLP lungs were associated with longer hospitalization (26 versus 20 d, P < 0.001), higher ECMO use (19.2% versus 10.1%, P = 0.004), and a trend toward lower survival, though not statistically significant.

Conclusions: DCD lungs yield survival comparable to DBD despite greater perioperative morbidity. NRP procurement may mitigate morbidity relative to DPP. Incorporating NRP into DCD practice may enhance lung utilization while maintaining acceptable outcomes.

基于采购策略的美国循环死亡肺移植后捐赠的结果:一个器官共享分析的联合网络。
背景:循环性死亡后捐赠(DCD)越来越多地用于扩大供体池。在DCD中,直接采购和灌注(DPP)和胸腹恒温区域灌注(TA-NRP)已成为不同的采购策略。然而,结果仍不清楚,特别是与体外肺灌注(EVLP)联合使用。方法:查询联合器官共享网络数据库中2019年12月至2025年3月间进行的成人肺移植手术。接受者分为脑死亡后捐赠(DBD)、DCD DPP和DCD TA-NRP。对DBD与DCD、DBD与DPP、DBD与TA-NRP、DPP与TA-NRP进行倾向评分匹配。其他分析包括DBD与DCD EVLP亚组。结果包括围手术期发病率、原发性移植物功能障碍3级(PGD3)和生存率。结果:与DBD相比,DCD患者围手术期发病率增加,包括住院时间更长(22天对19天,P < 0.001),术后ECMO使用率更高(15.2%对8.1%,P < 0.001), PGD3发生率更高(25.6%对15.6%,P < 0.001),尽管生存率相似(P = 0.74)。TA-NRP和DPP肺的预后相当,TA-NRP的围手术期发病率略低。在EVLP受者中,DCD EVLP肺与较长的住院时间(26天对20天,P < 0.001)、较高的ECMO使用率(19.2%对10.1%,P = 0.004)以及较低的生存率相关,但无统计学意义。结论:DCD肺的生存率与DBD相当,尽管围手术期发病率更高。与DPP相比,NRP的采购可能会降低发病率。将NRP纳入DCD实践可以提高肺利用率,同时保持可接受的结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Transplantation
Transplantation 医学-免疫学
CiteScore
8.50
自引率
11.30%
发文量
1906
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: The official journal of The Transplantation Society, and the International Liver Transplantation Society, Transplantation is published monthly and is the most cited and influential journal in the field, with more than 25,000 citations per year. Transplantation has been the trusted source for extensive and timely coverage of the most important advances in transplantation for over 50 years. The Editors and Editorial Board are an international group of research and clinical leaders that includes many pioneers of the field, representing a diverse range of areas of expertise. This capable editorial team provides thoughtful and thorough peer review, and delivers rapid, careful and insightful editorial evaluation of all manuscripts submitted to the journal. Transplantation is committed to rapid review and publication. The journal remains competitive with a time to first decision of fewer than 21 days. Transplantation was the first in the field to offer CME credit to its peer reviewers for reviews completed. The journal publishes original research articles in original clinical science and original basic science. Short reports bring attention to research at the forefront of the field. Other areas covered include cell therapy and islet transplantation, immunobiology and genomics, and xenotransplantation. ​
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书