Flow-controlled ventilation during EVLP improves oxygenation and preserves alveolar recruitment.
Donor management
Ex vivo lung perfusion
Flow-controlled ventilation
Lung transplantation
Porcine large animal model
Volume-controlled ventilation
Journal
Intensive care medicine experimental
ISSN: 2197-425X
Titre abrégé: Intensive Care Med Exp
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 101645149
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
25 Nov 2020
25 Nov 2020
Historique:
received:
18
06
2020
accepted:
17
11
2020
entrez:
25
11
2020
pubmed:
26
11
2020
medline:
26
11
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Ex vivo lung perfusion (EVLP) is a widespread accepted platform for preservation and evaluation of donor lungs prior to lung transplantation (LTx). Standard lungs are ventilated using volume-controlled ventilation (VCV). We investigated the effects of flow-controlled ventilation (FCV) in a large animal EVLP model. Fourteen porcine lungs were mounted on EVLP after a warm ischemic interval of 2 h and randomized in two groups (n = 7/group). In VCV, 7 grafts were conventionally ventilated and in FCV, 7 grafts were ventilated by flow-controlled ventilation. EVLP physiologic parameters (compliance, pulmonary vascular resistance and oxygenation) were recorded hourly. After 6 h of EVLP, broncho-alveolar lavage (BAL) was performed and biopsies for wet-to-dry weight (W/D) ratio and histology were taken. The left lung was inflated, frozen in liquid nitrogen vapors and scanned with computed tomography (CT) to assess regional distribution of Hounsfield units (HU). All lungs endured 6 h of EVLP. Oxygenation was better in FCV compared to VCV (p = 0.01) and the decrease in lung compliance was less in FCV (p = 0.03). W/D ratio, pathology and BAL samples did not differ between both groups (p = 0.16, p = 0.55 and p = 0.62). Overall, CT densities tended to be less pronounced in FCV (p = 0.05). Distribution of CT densities revealed a higher proportion of well-aerated lung parts in FCV compared to VCV (p = 0.01). FCV in pulmonary grafts mounted on EVLP is feasible and leads to improved oxygenation and alveolar recruitment. This ventilation strategy might prolong EVLP over time, with less risk for volutrauma and atelectrauma.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Ex vivo lung perfusion (EVLP) is a widespread accepted platform for preservation and evaluation of donor lungs prior to lung transplantation (LTx). Standard lungs are ventilated using volume-controlled ventilation (VCV). We investigated the effects of flow-controlled ventilation (FCV) in a large animal EVLP model. Fourteen porcine lungs were mounted on EVLP after a warm ischemic interval of 2 h and randomized in two groups (n = 7/group). In VCV, 7 grafts were conventionally ventilated and in FCV, 7 grafts were ventilated by flow-controlled ventilation. EVLP physiologic parameters (compliance, pulmonary vascular resistance and oxygenation) were recorded hourly. After 6 h of EVLP, broncho-alveolar lavage (BAL) was performed and biopsies for wet-to-dry weight (W/D) ratio and histology were taken. The left lung was inflated, frozen in liquid nitrogen vapors and scanned with computed tomography (CT) to assess regional distribution of Hounsfield units (HU).
RESULTS
RESULTS
All lungs endured 6 h of EVLP. Oxygenation was better in FCV compared to VCV (p = 0.01) and the decrease in lung compliance was less in FCV (p = 0.03). W/D ratio, pathology and BAL samples did not differ between both groups (p = 0.16, p = 0.55 and p = 0.62). Overall, CT densities tended to be less pronounced in FCV (p = 0.05). Distribution of CT densities revealed a higher proportion of well-aerated lung parts in FCV compared to VCV (p = 0.01).
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
FCV in pulmonary grafts mounted on EVLP is feasible and leads to improved oxygenation and alveolar recruitment. This ventilation strategy might prolong EVLP over time, with less risk for volutrauma and atelectrauma.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33237343
doi: 10.1186/s40635-020-00360-w
pii: 10.1186/s40635-020-00360-w
pmc: PMC7686942
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
70Subventions
Organisme : KULeuven
ID : C24/18/073
Références
Transpl Int. 2015 Jun;28(6):643-56
pubmed: 24629039
Anesth Analg. 2017 Oct;125(4):1246-1252
pubmed: 28368939
Clin Chest Med. 2016 Dec;37(4):633-646
pubmed: 27842744
Lancet Respir Med. 2018 May;6(5):357-367
pubmed: 29650408
J Thorac Dis. 2018 Apr;10(Suppl 8):S910-S923
pubmed: 29744218
Stem Cell Res Ther. 2017 Jul 5;8(1):159
pubmed: 28676074
Med Hypotheses. 2018 Dec;121:167-176
pubmed: 30396474
Am J Transplant. 2018 Jun;18(6):1518-1526
pubmed: 29446226
Crit Care Med. 2020 Mar;48(3):e241-e248
pubmed: 31856000
Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2018 Oct;35(10):736-744
pubmed: 29734208
Br J Anaesth. 2014 Sep;113(3):474-83
pubmed: 24694683
Transplant Proc. 2019 Jul - Aug;51(6):2022-2028
pubmed: 31303418
J Heart Lung Transplant. 2017 May 20;:
pubmed: 28587802
J Surg Res. 2019 Jul;239:300-308
pubmed: 30901722
Anesthesiology. 2016 May;124(5):1100-8
pubmed: 26872367
Ann Transl Med. 2017 Jul;5(14):286
pubmed: 28828361
Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2019 Dec;36(12):963-971
pubmed: 31644514
Crit Care. 2018 Sep 29;22(1):245
pubmed: 30268138
J Thorac Dis. 2017 Dec;9(12):5458-5471
pubmed: 29312756
Ann Transl Med. 2018 Oct;6(19):378
pubmed: 30460252
N Engl J Med. 2013 Nov 28;369(22):2126-36
pubmed: 24283226
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2001 Nov 1;164(9):1701-11
pubmed: 11719313
Transpl Int. 2016 Jan;29(1):88-97
pubmed: 26264867