Noah Weingarten, Atul C Mehta, Marie Budev, Usman Ahmad, James Yun, Kenneth McCurry, Haytham Elgharably
{"title":"老年人的单肺移植与双肺移植:倾向匹配分析","authors":"Noah Weingarten, Atul C Mehta, Marie Budev, Usman Ahmad, James Yun, Kenneth McCurry, Haytham Elgharably","doi":"10.1016/j.chest.2024.08.044","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Single lung transplantation (SLT) is associated with worse long-term outcomes than bilateral lung transplantation (BLT), but often is performed in older adults at risk of not tolerating BLT.</p><p><strong>Research question: </strong>How do the outcomes of SLT and BLT compare among older adult recipients?</p><p><strong>Study design and methods: </strong>The Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients database (2005-2022) was queried for lung transplant recipients 65 years of age or older. Patients were stratified by whether they underwent BLT or SLT and were propensity matched. Baseline characteristics and morbidity were compared with frequentist statistics. Survival was analyzed via Kaplan-Meier estimation. Risk factors for mortality were identified with Cox regression.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 9,904 included patients, 4,829 patients (48.8%) underwent SLT. Patients who underwent SLT had lower lung allocation scores (39.6 vs 40.6; P < .001), more interstitial lung disease (74.4% vs 64.6%; P < .001), and lower rates of bridging (0.7% vs 2.4%; P < .001). Groups did not differ significantly by sex, BMI, or donor characteristics. Propensity matching resulted in 2,539 patients in each group. On matched analysis, patients undergoing SLT had shorter lengths of stay (14 days vs 18 day), lower reintubation rates (14.7% vs 19.8%), and less postoperative dialysis use (4.2% vs 6.4%; P < .001 for all). Patients who underwent SLT had comparable survival at 30 days (97.6% vs 97.3%; P = .414) and 1 year (85.5% vs 86.3%; P = .496), but lower survival at 5 years (45.4% vs 53.4%; P < .001) on matched analysis. SLT was a risk factor for 5-year mortality (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.19; P < .001).</p><p><strong>Interpretation: </strong>In older adults, SLT is associated with less morbidity and comparable early survival relative to BLT, but lower 5-year survival. SLT is reasonable to perform in older adults at high risk of not tolerating BLT.</p>","PeriodicalId":9782,"journal":{"name":"Chest","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":9.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Single vs Double Lung Transplantation in Older Adults: A Propensity-Matched Analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Noah Weingarten, Atul C Mehta, Marie Budev, Usman Ahmad, James Yun, Kenneth McCurry, Haytham Elgharably\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.chest.2024.08.044\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Single lung transplantation (SLT) is associated with worse long-term outcomes than bilateral lung transplantation (BLT), but often is performed in older adults at risk of not tolerating BLT.</p><p><strong>Research question: </strong>How do the outcomes of SLT and BLT compare among older adult recipients?</p><p><strong>Study design and methods: </strong>The Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients database (2005-2022) was queried for lung transplant recipients 65 years of age or older. Patients were stratified by whether they underwent BLT or SLT and were propensity matched. Baseline characteristics and morbidity were compared with frequentist statistics. Survival was analyzed via Kaplan-Meier estimation. Risk factors for mortality were identified with Cox regression.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 9,904 included patients, 4,829 patients (48.8%) underwent SLT. Patients who underwent SLT had lower lung allocation scores (39.6 vs 40.6; P < .001), more interstitial lung disease (74.4% vs 64.6%; P < .001), and lower rates of bridging (0.7% vs 2.4%; P < .001). Groups did not differ significantly by sex, BMI, or donor characteristics. Propensity matching resulted in 2,539 patients in each group. On matched analysis, patients undergoing SLT had shorter lengths of stay (14 days vs 18 day), lower reintubation rates (14.7% vs 19.8%), and less postoperative dialysis use (4.2% vs 6.4%; P < .001 for all). Patients who underwent SLT had comparable survival at 30 days (97.6% vs 97.3%; P = .414) and 1 year (85.5% vs 86.3%; P = .496), but lower survival at 5 years (45.4% vs 53.4%; P < .001) on matched analysis. SLT was a risk factor for 5-year mortality (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.19; P < .001).</p><p><strong>Interpretation: </strong>In older adults, SLT is associated with less morbidity and comparable early survival relative to BLT, but lower 5-year survival. SLT is reasonable to perform in older adults at high risk of not tolerating BLT.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9782,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Chest\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":9.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Chest\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chest.2024.08.044\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chest","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chest.2024.08.044","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Single vs Double Lung Transplantation in Older Adults: A Propensity-Matched Analysis.
Background: Single lung transplantation (SLT) is associated with worse long-term outcomes than bilateral lung transplantation (BLT), but often is performed in older adults at risk of not tolerating BLT.
Research question: How do the outcomes of SLT and BLT compare among older adult recipients?
Study design and methods: The Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients database (2005-2022) was queried for lung transplant recipients 65 years of age or older. Patients were stratified by whether they underwent BLT or SLT and were propensity matched. Baseline characteristics and morbidity were compared with frequentist statistics. Survival was analyzed via Kaplan-Meier estimation. Risk factors for mortality were identified with Cox regression.
Results: Of 9,904 included patients, 4,829 patients (48.8%) underwent SLT. Patients who underwent SLT had lower lung allocation scores (39.6 vs 40.6; P < .001), more interstitial lung disease (74.4% vs 64.6%; P < .001), and lower rates of bridging (0.7% vs 2.4%; P < .001). Groups did not differ significantly by sex, BMI, or donor characteristics. Propensity matching resulted in 2,539 patients in each group. On matched analysis, patients undergoing SLT had shorter lengths of stay (14 days vs 18 day), lower reintubation rates (14.7% vs 19.8%), and less postoperative dialysis use (4.2% vs 6.4%; P < .001 for all). Patients who underwent SLT had comparable survival at 30 days (97.6% vs 97.3%; P = .414) and 1 year (85.5% vs 86.3%; P = .496), but lower survival at 5 years (45.4% vs 53.4%; P < .001) on matched analysis. SLT was a risk factor for 5-year mortality (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.19; P < .001).
Interpretation: In older adults, SLT is associated with less morbidity and comparable early survival relative to BLT, but lower 5-year survival. SLT is reasonable to perform in older adults at high risk of not tolerating BLT.
期刊介绍:
At CHEST, our mission is to revolutionize patient care through the collaboration of multidisciplinary clinicians in the fields of pulmonary, critical care, and sleep medicine. We achieve this by publishing cutting-edge clinical research that addresses current challenges and brings forth future advancements. To enhance understanding in a rapidly evolving field, CHEST also features review articles, commentaries, and facilitates discussions on emerging controversies. We place great emphasis on scientific rigor, employing a rigorous peer review process, and ensuring all accepted content is published online within two weeks.