Outcomes of listing for lung and heart-lung transplantation in pulmonary hypertension: comparative experience in France and the UK.
Journal
ERJ open research
ISSN: 2312-0541
Titre abrégé: ERJ Open Res
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101671641
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jan 2024
Jan 2024
Historique:
received:
20
07
2023
accepted:
17
11
2023
medline:
23
1
2024
pubmed:
23
1
2024
entrez:
23
1
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Lung or heart-lung transplantation (LT/HLT) for severe pulmonary hypertension (PH) as the primary disease indication carries a high risk of waiting list mortality and post-transplant complications. France and the UK both have coordinated PH patient services but with different referral pathways for accessing LT services. We conducted a comparative analysis of adult PH patients listed for LT/HLT in the UK and France. We included 211 PH patients in France (2006-2018) and 170 in the UK (2010-2019). Cumulative incidence of transplant, delisting and waiting list death within 3 years were 81%, 4% and 11% in France Access to transplantation for PH patients is better in France than in the UK where more patients were delisted due to clinical deterioration because of longer waiting time. High rates of priority listing occurred in both countries. Survival for those achieving transplantation was slightly better in France. Ensuring optimal outcomes after transplant listing for PH patients is challenging and may involve early listing of higher risk patients, increasing donor lung utilisation and improving allocation rules for these specific patients.
Sections du résumé
Background
UNASSIGNED
Lung or heart-lung transplantation (LT/HLT) for severe pulmonary hypertension (PH) as the primary disease indication carries a high risk of waiting list mortality and post-transplant complications. France and the UK both have coordinated PH patient services but with different referral pathways for accessing LT services.
Methods
UNASSIGNED
We conducted a comparative analysis of adult PH patients listed for LT/HLT in the UK and France.
Results
UNASSIGNED
We included 211 PH patients in France (2006-2018) and 170 in the UK (2010-2019). Cumulative incidence of transplant, delisting and waiting list death within 3 years were 81%, 4% and 11% in France
Conclusion
UNASSIGNED
Access to transplantation for PH patients is better in France than in the UK where more patients were delisted due to clinical deterioration because of longer waiting time. High rates of priority listing occurred in both countries. Survival for those achieving transplantation was slightly better in France. Ensuring optimal outcomes after transplant listing for PH patients is challenging and may involve early listing of higher risk patients, increasing donor lung utilisation and improving allocation rules for these specific patients.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38259809
doi: 10.1183/23120541.00521-2023
pii: 00521-2023
pmc: PMC10801724
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Informations de copyright
Copyright ©The authors 2024.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Conflict of interest: P. Pradère, J. Le Pavec, A. Pozza, G. Meachery, O. Mercier and E. Fadel have nothing to declare. Conflict of interest: S. Bos received lecture fees from Therakos (Mallinckrodt) and Jazz, and conference registration/travel support from GlaxoSmithKline and Takeda, outside of the submitted work. Conflict of interest: A. Nair received personal fees from Janssen, outside of the submitted work. Conflict of interest: J. Lordan reports travel support from Johnson and Johnson outside the submitted work and an honorarium from MSD for a PH advisory board meeting. Conflict of interest: M. Humbert reports grants from AOP Orphan, Janssen and Shou Ti; consulting fees from Aerovate, Altavant, AOP Orphan, Chiesi, Ferrer, Janssen, MorphogenIX, Shou Ti, Tiakis and United Therapuetics; lecture honoraria from Janssen; grants, consulting fees and personal fees for advisory board participation from Acceleron; grants and personal fees from Actelion; grants, consulting fees and personal fees from Bayer; personal fees from GSK; grants, consulting fees, lecture honoraria and personal fees for advisory board participation from Merck; personal fees from Novartis; personal fees from AstraZeneca; personal fees from Sanofi; and advisory board participation from Altavant, Janssen and United Therapeutics, outside the submitted work. Conflict of interest: L. Savale reports personal fees from Actelion, personal fees from MSD, grants and personal fees from GSK, outside the submitted work. Conflict of interest: A.J. Fisher reports grants from GlaxoSmithKline, grants, personal fees and nonfinancial support from Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals, personal fees from Altavant, and grants from Pfizer, outside the submitted work.