Search

The concept of the International and Inter-Society Co-ordination Committee (I2C2) has been introduced at the International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation (ISHLT) annual meeting in Prague. It is a pivotal role of I2C2 to develop formal relationships with other societies involved in the field of thoracic transplantation to attain mutual benefits, share membership, and achieve common goals. This editorial is on behalf of an initiative of the I2C2 committee chairs to report about a specific problem related to thoracic transplantation in 1 European country and the approach chosen by the local national authorities, together with the transplant community, to address this issue. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Heart and lung procurements are multiphased processes often accompanied by an array of complex logistics. Approaches to donor evaluation and management, organ procurement, and organ preservation vary among individual procurement teams. Because early graft failure remains a major cause of mortality in contemporary thoracic organ transplant recipients, we sought to establish some standardization in the procurement process. This paper, in this vein, represents an international consensus statement on donor heart and lung procurement and is designed to serve as a guide for physicians, surgeons, and other providers who manage donors to best optimize the clinical status for the procurement of both heart and lungs for transplantation. Donation after brain death (DBD) and donation after circulatory determination death (referred to as donation after circulatory death [DCD] for the remainder of the paper) for both heart and lung transplantation will be discussed in this paper. Although the data available on DCD heart donation are limited, information regarding the surgical technique for procurement is included within this consensus statement. Furthermore, this paper will focus on adult DBD and DCD heart and lung procurement. Currently, no certification, which is either recognized and/or endorsed by the transplant community at large, exists for the training of a cardiothoracic procurement surgeon. Nevertheless, establishing a training curriculum and credentialing requirements are beyond the scope of this paper. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patients awaiting heart transplantation in Eurotransplant are prioritized by waiting time and medical urgency. To reduce mortality, the introduction of post-transplant survival in an allocation model based on the concept of survival benefit might be more appropriate. The aim of this study was to assess the prognostic accuracy of the Heart Failure Survival Score (HFSS), the Seattle Heart Failure Model (SHFM), the Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support (INTERMACS) model, and the Index for Mortality Prediction After Cardiac Transplantation (IMPACT) score for predicting mortality. Methods: The HFSS, SHFM, the adapted SHFM, and the INTERMACS model were evaluated for predicting waiting list mortality among heart transplant candidates, and the IMPACT score was tested for predicting post-transplant mortality in separate Cox regression models. Included were the 448 adult heart transplant candidates listed for an urgent status between October 2010 and June 2011 in Eurotransplant. A Cardiac Allocation Score (CAS) was calculated based on the estimated survival times as predicted by the scores. All analyses were performed for the total cohort and separately for ventricular assist device (VAD) and non-VAD patients. Results: Mortality on the waiting list could significantly be predicted in the non-VAD cohort by HFSS (p = 0.005) and SHFM (p < 0.0001) and after transplant by IMPACT (p < 0.0001). None of the tested scores could predict mortality among VAD-supported patients. Conclusions: In non-VAD patients, the HFSS, SHFM, and IMPACT provide accurate risk stratification. Further studies will reveal whether these models should be considered as the basis for a new heart allocation policy in Eurotransplant. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Background: The aim of this study was to design and validate a heart donor score that reflects experts'' perceived risk of allograft failure. Methods: All heart donors reported to Eurotransplant between January 1, 2005 and December 31, 2008 (N = 4,110) were used to create a donor score. Based on observed discard rates and using multivariate regression, points were assigned for the following donor factors: age; cause of death; body mass index (BMI); diabetes mellitus (DM); duration of ICU stay; compromised history (drug, abuse, sepsis, meningitis, malignancy, HBsAg+ or anti-HCV+); hypertension; cardiac arrest; echocardiography; coronary angiogram; serum sodium; and noradrenaline and dopamine/dobutamine doses. The donor score was obtained by adding all points. All heart donors reported to Eurotransplant in 2009 were included to validate the score (N = 885). Results: All donor factors, except BMI, DM and duration of ICU stay, significantly predicted discard. Based on the median value of the score, donors were classified into low-risk donors (LRDs: ≤16 points) and high-risk donors (HRDs: ≥17 points). In the validation set, discard rates were significantly different when comparing HRDs (35%) and LRDs (7%) (p < 0.0001). In addition, the heart donor score was significantly associated with 3-year survival: LRD 81.5% vs HRD 70.0% (p = 0.004). Conclusions: The heart donor score accurately reflects the likelihood of organ acceptance and predicts long-term patient mortality. Application of this score at time of donor reporting may facilitate donor risk assessment and allow for more appropriate matching of extended criteria donor hearts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The purpose of the study was to investigate the impact of the lung allocation score (LAS) on mortality among highly urgent (HU) and urgent (U) lung transplant (LTx) candidates in Eurotransplant (ET) and to identify useful additional parameters (LASplus). Methods: All adult LTx candidates for whom a first request for HU or U status was made in 2008 in ET were included (N = 317). Patients were followed until LTx, death on the waiting list (WL), delisting, or closure date (i.e., January 10, 2010). The relationship between the LAS/LASplus and waiting list, post-transplant, and overall mortality was assessed with a multivariate regression model. The LAS and LASplus were decomposed into their basic waitlist and post-transplant components. Results: Waiting list mortality rate was 22% and 1-year post-transplant mortality rate was 34%. The waitlist component of the LASplus was significantly associated with waiting list mortality (hazard ratio [HR] 1.91, p = 0.021), whereas the LAS was not (p = 0.063). The post-transplant components of both scores were significantly associated with 1-year post-transplant mortality (LAS: HR 2.69, p = 0.005; LASplus: HR 2.55, p = 0.004). Both scores strongly predicted overall mortality (LAS: HR 1.65, p = 0.008; LASplus: HR 1.72, p = 0.005). Conclusion: LAS accurately predicts overall mortality in critically ill transplant candidates and should therefore be considered as the basis for a new lung allocation policy in ET. An adjustment of the original LAS may be indicated to accurately predict waiting list mortality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This tenth official pediatric report of the International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation (ISHLT) covers the international pediatric lung and heart–lung transplantation experience from 1982 to 2006. As of last year’s report, pediatric lung and heart–lung transplant data are now reported separately from pediatric heart transplant data and adult lung transplant data. For the first time this year, Registry data are analyzed by geographic region in addition to the usual aggregate analyses. All figures and tables included in this report and additional supplementary slides are available from the ISHLT website (www.ishlt.org/registries). [Copyright &y& Elsevier]