Alice L Zhou, Maria R Jennings, Armaan F Akbar, Jessica M Ruck, Atharv Oak, Andrew Kalra, Emily L Larson, Alfred J Casillan, Jinny S Ha, Christian A Merlo, Errol L Bush
{"title":"无插管体外膜肺氧合作为肺移植桥梁的使用情况和结果。","authors":"Alice L Zhou, Maria R Jennings, Armaan F Akbar, Jessica M Ruck, Atharv Oak, Andrew Kalra, Emily L Larson, Alfred J Casillan, Jinny S Ha, Christian A Merlo, Errol L Bush","doi":"10.1016/j.healun.2024.10.021","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Non-intubated extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) has become an increasingly common method of support for patients with severe respiratory failure. Since data on its use as a bridge to lung transplant remain limited to single-center studies, we evaluated its use in a national cohort.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Adult lung-only transplant recipients bridged with ECMO 5/4/2005-3/8/2023 in the United Network for Organ Sharing database were categorized by use of ECMO and mechanical ventilation at transplant (ECMO+MV vs. ECMO-only). We compared post-transplant intubation and ECMO at 72 hours using logistic regression, length of stay using negative binomial regression, and post-transplant survival using Cox regression.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The 1,599 transplants identified included 902 (56.4%) bridged with ECMO+MV and 697 (43.6%) bridged with ECMO-only. ECMO-only recipients had higher median age (52 vs. 49 years, p<0.001), shorter ischemic times (5.7 vs. 6.0 hours, p=0.003), and similar lung allocation scores (89.5 vs. 89.6, p=0.11). ECMO-only recipients had lower likelihood of intubation at 72 hours (56.5% vs. 77.5%; aOR 0.33 [95% CI: 0.25, 0.42], p<0.001) and shorter lengths of stay (28 vs. 35 days; coefficient -0.19 [95% CI: -0.27, -0.11], p<0.001). ECMO-only recipients had higher 90-day survival (92.1% vs. 89.1%; aHR 0.69 [95% CI: 0.48, 0.99], p=0.04) but similar 1-year (83.1% vs. 81.5%; aHR 0.87 [95% CI: 0.67, 1.12], p=0.27) and 5-year (54.6% vs. 54.7%; aHR 0.98 [95% CI: 0.82, 1.17], p=0.83) survival.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Non-intubated ECMO bridge to lung transplant was associated with improved perioperative outcomes and short-term survival and should be considered for candidates requiring ECMO.</p>","PeriodicalId":15900,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Utilization and Outcomes of Non-Intubated Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation as a Bridge to Lung Transplant.\",\"authors\":\"Alice L Zhou, Maria R Jennings, Armaan F Akbar, Jessica M Ruck, Atharv Oak, Andrew Kalra, Emily L Larson, Alfred J Casillan, Jinny S Ha, Christian A Merlo, Errol L Bush\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.healun.2024.10.021\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Non-intubated extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) has become an increasingly common method of support for patients with severe respiratory failure. Since data on its use as a bridge to lung transplant remain limited to single-center studies, we evaluated its use in a national cohort.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Adult lung-only transplant recipients bridged with ECMO 5/4/2005-3/8/2023 in the United Network for Organ Sharing database were categorized by use of ECMO and mechanical ventilation at transplant (ECMO+MV vs. ECMO-only). We compared post-transplant intubation and ECMO at 72 hours using logistic regression, length of stay using negative binomial regression, and post-transplant survival using Cox regression.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The 1,599 transplants identified included 902 (56.4%) bridged with ECMO+MV and 697 (43.6%) bridged with ECMO-only. ECMO-only recipients had higher median age (52 vs. 49 years, p<0.001), shorter ischemic times (5.7 vs. 6.0 hours, p=0.003), and similar lung allocation scores (89.5 vs. 89.6, p=0.11). ECMO-only recipients had lower likelihood of intubation at 72 hours (56.5% vs. 77.5%; aOR 0.33 [95% CI: 0.25, 0.42], p<0.001) and shorter lengths of stay (28 vs. 35 days; coefficient -0.19 [95% CI: -0.27, -0.11], p<0.001). ECMO-only recipients had higher 90-day survival (92.1% vs. 89.1%; aHR 0.69 [95% CI: 0.48, 0.99], p=0.04) but similar 1-year (83.1% vs. 81.5%; aHR 0.87 [95% CI: 0.67, 1.12], p=0.27) and 5-year (54.6% vs. 54.7%; aHR 0.98 [95% CI: 0.82, 1.17], p=0.83) survival.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Non-intubated ECMO bridge to lung transplant was associated with improved perioperative outcomes and short-term survival and should be considered for candidates requiring ECMO.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15900,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healun.2024.10.021\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healun.2024.10.021","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Utilization and Outcomes of Non-Intubated Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation as a Bridge to Lung Transplant.
Background: Non-intubated extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) has become an increasingly common method of support for patients with severe respiratory failure. Since data on its use as a bridge to lung transplant remain limited to single-center studies, we evaluated its use in a national cohort.
Methods: Adult lung-only transplant recipients bridged with ECMO 5/4/2005-3/8/2023 in the United Network for Organ Sharing database were categorized by use of ECMO and mechanical ventilation at transplant (ECMO+MV vs. ECMO-only). We compared post-transplant intubation and ECMO at 72 hours using logistic regression, length of stay using negative binomial regression, and post-transplant survival using Cox regression.
Results: The 1,599 transplants identified included 902 (56.4%) bridged with ECMO+MV and 697 (43.6%) bridged with ECMO-only. ECMO-only recipients had higher median age (52 vs. 49 years, p<0.001), shorter ischemic times (5.7 vs. 6.0 hours, p=0.003), and similar lung allocation scores (89.5 vs. 89.6, p=0.11). ECMO-only recipients had lower likelihood of intubation at 72 hours (56.5% vs. 77.5%; aOR 0.33 [95% CI: 0.25, 0.42], p<0.001) and shorter lengths of stay (28 vs. 35 days; coefficient -0.19 [95% CI: -0.27, -0.11], p<0.001). ECMO-only recipients had higher 90-day survival (92.1% vs. 89.1%; aHR 0.69 [95% CI: 0.48, 0.99], p=0.04) but similar 1-year (83.1% vs. 81.5%; aHR 0.87 [95% CI: 0.67, 1.12], p=0.27) and 5-year (54.6% vs. 54.7%; aHR 0.98 [95% CI: 0.82, 1.17], p=0.83) survival.
Conclusions: Non-intubated ECMO bridge to lung transplant was associated with improved perioperative outcomes and short-term survival and should be considered for candidates requiring ECMO.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation, the official publication of the International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation, brings readers essential scholarly and timely information in the field of cardio-pulmonary transplantation, mechanical and biological support of the failing heart, advanced lung disease (including pulmonary vascular disease) and cell replacement therapy. Importantly, the journal also serves as a medium of communication of pre-clinical sciences in all these rapidly expanding areas.