Matthew T. McGoldrick, Iulia Barbur, Eric W. Etchill, Katherine Giuliano, Steven Hsu, Kavita Sharma, Ahmet Kilic, Chun Woo Choi
{"title":"心脏搭桥至移植的体外膜氧合时间与心脏移植存活","authors":"Matthew T. McGoldrick, Iulia Barbur, Eric W. Etchill, Katherine Giuliano, Steven Hsu, Kavita Sharma, Ahmet Kilic, Chun Woo Choi","doi":"10.1155/2023/4339284","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n <p><i>Background</i>. The 2018 Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) heart allocation policy change prioritizes patients bridged to transplant with mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices, including extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). As a result, the use of ECMO has significantly increased. <i>Methods</i>. We reviewed the OPTN database for adult patients undergoing heart transplant after bridge with ECMO between January 1<sup>st</sup> 2000 and October 18<sup>th</sup> 2018. We excluded patients with ≥180 days of ECMO duration, prior transplants, and those using additional MCS devices. Survival and morbidity outcomes of patients with ≥7 days of pre-transplant ECMO were compared to those of patients with <7 days. <i>Results</i>. Of 362 eligible transplant recipients, 163 (45%) utilized <7 days of pre-transplant ECMO and 199 (55%) utilized ≥7 days. Those with ≥7 days were younger (median age: 43 [28–54] vs. 50 [36–57] years, <i>p</i> = 0.006) and more likely to have temporary waitlist inactivity (18% vs. 7%, <i>p</i> = 0.003) with significantly longer duration of ECMO use (median: 14 [9–24] vs. 4 [2–5] days, <i>p</i> < 0.001). Patients with ≥7 days of ECMO had comparable survival to those with <7 days at one year (81.1% vs. 79.4%, <i>p</i> = 0.64) and five years (61.1% vs. 49.3%, <i>p</i> = 0.27). After adjustment for clinically relevant variables, duration of ECMO ≥7 days did not increase mortality at five years (HR = 0.90, <i>p</i> = 0.59). <i>Conclusions</i>. Longer duration of ECMO (≥7 days vs. <7 days) among patients successfully bridged to transplant is not associated with increased mortality or selected adverse outcome, including graft failure or rejection, at up to five years.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":15367,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cardiac Surgery","volume":"2023 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1155/2023/4339284","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Duration of Bridge-to-Transplant Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation and Heart Transplant Survival\",\"authors\":\"Matthew T. McGoldrick, Iulia Barbur, Eric W. Etchill, Katherine Giuliano, Steven Hsu, Kavita Sharma, Ahmet Kilic, Chun Woo Choi\",\"doi\":\"10.1155/2023/4339284\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n <p><i>Background</i>. The 2018 Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) heart allocation policy change prioritizes patients bridged to transplant with mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices, including extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). As a result, the use of ECMO has significantly increased. <i>Methods</i>. We reviewed the OPTN database for adult patients undergoing heart transplant after bridge with ECMO between January 1<sup>st</sup> 2000 and October 18<sup>th</sup> 2018. We excluded patients with ≥180 days of ECMO duration, prior transplants, and those using additional MCS devices. Survival and morbidity outcomes of patients with ≥7 days of pre-transplant ECMO were compared to those of patients with <7 days. <i>Results</i>. Of 362 eligible transplant recipients, 163 (45%) utilized <7 days of pre-transplant ECMO and 199 (55%) utilized ≥7 days. Those with ≥7 days were younger (median age: 43 [28–54] vs. 50 [36–57] years, <i>p</i> = 0.006) and more likely to have temporary waitlist inactivity (18% vs. 7%, <i>p</i> = 0.003) with significantly longer duration of ECMO use (median: 14 [9–24] vs. 4 [2–5] days, <i>p</i> < 0.001). Patients with ≥7 days of ECMO had comparable survival to those with <7 days at one year (81.1% vs. 79.4%, <i>p</i> = 0.64) and five years (61.1% vs. 49.3%, <i>p</i> = 0.27). After adjustment for clinically relevant variables, duration of ECMO ≥7 days did not increase mortality at five years (HR = 0.90, <i>p</i> = 0.59). <i>Conclusions</i>. Longer duration of ECMO (≥7 days vs. <7 days) among patients successfully bridged to transplant is not associated with increased mortality or selected adverse outcome, including graft failure or rejection, at up to five years.</p>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15367,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Cardiac Surgery\",\"volume\":\"2023 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1155/2023/4339284\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Cardiac Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2023/4339284\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cardiac Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2023/4339284","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景。2018年器官获取和移植网络(OPTN)心脏分配政策改变优先考虑使用机械循环支持(MCS)设备(包括体外膜氧合(ECMO))进行移植的患者。因此,ECMO的使用显著增加。方法。我们回顾了2000年1月1日至2018年10月18日期间接受ECMO桥接心脏移植的成年患者的OPTN数据库。我们排除了ECMO持续时间≥180天、既往移植和使用额外MCS装置的患者。将移植前ECMO≥7天患者与移植前ECMO≥7天患者的生存和发病率结果进行比较。结果。在362名符合条件的移植受者中,163名(45%)使用了移植前7天的ECMO, 199名(55%)使用了≥7天的ECMO。≥7天的患者更年轻(中位年龄:43[28-54]对50[36-57]岁,p = 0.006),更有可能暂时不活动(18%对7%,p = 0.003), ECMO使用时间明显更长(中位时间:14[9-24]对4[2-5]天,p <;0.001)。≥7天ECMO患者的1年生存率(81.1% vs. 79.4%, p = 0.64)和5年生存率(61.1% vs. 49.3%, p = 0.27)与≥7天ECMO患者相当。调整临床相关变量后,ECMO≥7天的持续时间不会增加5年死亡率(HR = 0.90, p = 0.59)。结论。在成功桥接移植的患者中,较长的ECMO持续时间(≥7天vs <;7天)与死亡率增加或5年以内的特定不良结果(包括移植失败或排斥)无关。
Duration of Bridge-to-Transplant Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation and Heart Transplant Survival
Background. The 2018 Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) heart allocation policy change prioritizes patients bridged to transplant with mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices, including extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). As a result, the use of ECMO has significantly increased. Methods. We reviewed the OPTN database for adult patients undergoing heart transplant after bridge with ECMO between January 1st 2000 and October 18th 2018. We excluded patients with ≥180 days of ECMO duration, prior transplants, and those using additional MCS devices. Survival and morbidity outcomes of patients with ≥7 days of pre-transplant ECMO were compared to those of patients with <7 days. Results. Of 362 eligible transplant recipients, 163 (45%) utilized <7 days of pre-transplant ECMO and 199 (55%) utilized ≥7 days. Those with ≥7 days were younger (median age: 43 [28–54] vs. 50 [36–57] years, p = 0.006) and more likely to have temporary waitlist inactivity (18% vs. 7%, p = 0.003) with significantly longer duration of ECMO use (median: 14 [9–24] vs. 4 [2–5] days, p < 0.001). Patients with ≥7 days of ECMO had comparable survival to those with <7 days at one year (81.1% vs. 79.4%, p = 0.64) and five years (61.1% vs. 49.3%, p = 0.27). After adjustment for clinically relevant variables, duration of ECMO ≥7 days did not increase mortality at five years (HR = 0.90, p = 0.59). Conclusions. Longer duration of ECMO (≥7 days vs. <7 days) among patients successfully bridged to transplant is not associated with increased mortality or selected adverse outcome, including graft failure or rejection, at up to five years.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Cardiac Surgery (JCS) is a peer-reviewed journal devoted to contemporary surgical treatment of cardiac disease. Renown for its detailed "how to" methods, JCS''s well-illustrated, concise technical articles, critical reviews and commentaries are highly valued by dedicated readers worldwide.
With Editor-in-Chief Harold Lazar, MD and an internationally prominent editorial board, JCS continues its 20-year history as an important professional resource. Editorial coverage includes biologic support, mechanical cardiac assist and/or replacement and surgical techniques, and features current material on topics such as OPCAB surgery, stented and stentless valves, endovascular stent placement, atrial fibrillation, transplantation, percutaneous valve repair/replacement, left ventricular restoration surgery, immunobiology, and bridges to transplant and recovery.
In addition, special sections (Images in Cardiac Surgery, Cardiac Regeneration) and historical reviews stimulate reader interest. The journal also routinely publishes proceedings of important international symposia in a timely manner.