A Simple Prioritization Change to Lung Transplant Allocation May Result in Improved Outcomes.


Journal

The Annals of thoracic surgery
ISSN: 1552-6259
Titre abrégé: Ann Thorac Surg
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 15030100R

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
02 2021
Historique:
received: 20 01 2020
revised: 28 04 2020
accepted: 11 05 2020
pubmed: 21 7 2020
medline: 9 2 2021
entrez: 21 7 2020
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

The lung allocation score (LAS) significantly improved outcomes and wait list mortality in lung transplantation. However, mortality remains high for the sickest wait list candidates despite additional changes to allocation distance. Regulatory considerations of overhauling the current lung allocation system have met significant resistance, and changes would require years to implement. This study evaluates whether a modest change to the current system by prioritization of only high-LAS lung transplant candidates would result in lowered wait list mortality. The Thoracic Simulated Allocation Model was used to evaluate all lung transplant candidates and donor lungs recovered between July 1, 2009 and June 30, 2011. Current lung allocation rules (initial offer within a 250-nautical mile radius for ABO-identical then compatible offers) were run. Allocation was then changed for only patients with an LAS of50 or higher (high-LAS) to be prioritized within a 500-nautical mile radius with no stratification between ABO-identical and compatible offers. Ten iterations of each model were run. Primary end points were wait list mortality and posttransplant 1-year survival. A total of 6538 wait list candidates and transplant recipients were evaluated per iteration, for a total of 130,760 simulated patients. Compared with current allocation, the adjusted model had a 23.3% decrease in wait list mortality. Posttransplant 1-year survival was minimally affected. Without overhauling the entire system, simple prioritization changes to the allocation system for high-LAS candidates may lead to decreased wait list mortality and increased organ use. Importantly, these changes do not appear to lead to clinically significant changes in posttransplant 1-year survival.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
The lung allocation score (LAS) significantly improved outcomes and wait list mortality in lung transplantation. However, mortality remains high for the sickest wait list candidates despite additional changes to allocation distance. Regulatory considerations of overhauling the current lung allocation system have met significant resistance, and changes would require years to implement. This study evaluates whether a modest change to the current system by prioritization of only high-LAS lung transplant candidates would result in lowered wait list mortality.
METHODS
The Thoracic Simulated Allocation Model was used to evaluate all lung transplant candidates and donor lungs recovered between July 1, 2009 and June 30, 2011. Current lung allocation rules (initial offer within a 250-nautical mile radius for ABO-identical then compatible offers) were run. Allocation was then changed for only patients with an LAS of50 or higher (high-LAS) to be prioritized within a 500-nautical mile radius with no stratification between ABO-identical and compatible offers. Ten iterations of each model were run. Primary end points were wait list mortality and posttransplant 1-year survival.
RESULTS
A total of 6538 wait list candidates and transplant recipients were evaluated per iteration, for a total of 130,760 simulated patients. Compared with current allocation, the adjusted model had a 23.3% decrease in wait list mortality. Posttransplant 1-year survival was minimally affected.
CONCLUSIONS
Without overhauling the entire system, simple prioritization changes to the allocation system for high-LAS candidates may lead to decreased wait list mortality and increased organ use. Importantly, these changes do not appear to lead to clinically significant changes in posttransplant 1-year survival.

Identifiants

pubmed: 32687830
pii: S0003-4975(20)31157-7
doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2020.05.108
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Multicenter Study Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

427-435

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2021 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Auteurs

Stephanie H Chang (SH)

Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, New York University Langone Health, New York, New York. Electronic address: stephanie.chang@nyulangone.org.

Luis Angel (L)

Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, New York University Langone Health, New York, New York.

Deane E Smith (DE)

Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, New York University Langone Health, New York, New York.

Julius Carillo (J)

Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, New York University Langone Health, New York, New York.

Darya Rudym (D)

Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, New York University Langone Health, New York, New York.

Melissa Lesko (M)

Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, New York University Langone Health, New York, New York.

Kimberly Sureau (K)

Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, New York University Langone Health, New York, New York.

Robert A Montgomery (RA)

Department of Surgery, New York University Langone Health, New York, New York.

Nader Moazami (N)

Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, New York University Langone Health, New York, New York.

Zachary N Kon (ZN)

Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, New York University Langone Health, New York, New York.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH