4.4 Article

Airway Complications after Lung Transplantation: Long-Term Outcome of Silicone Stenting

Journal

RESPIRATION
Volume 83, Issue 3, Pages 245-252

Publisher

KARGER
DOI: 10.1159/000334905

Keywords

Airway complications; Airway stenosis; Airway stenting; Lung transplantation; Silicone stents

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Airway complications remain a significant cause of morbidity after lung transplantation. The majority of the centres that have published their results have used metal stents. Objectives: We report the long-term outcome of silicone stenting and subsequent stent removal in lung transplant recipients with stenotic airway complications. Method: From 1990 to 2008, 279 patients received 88 single, 170 double, and 21 heart-and-lung transplantations. Of 470 anastomoses at risk, 44 airway complications developed and were treated in 35 patients. Six lesions were treated with Nd:YAG laser and balloon dilatations only. Thirty-two silicone stents of Hood or Dumont type were inserted in 27 patients. Results: Symptoms were relieved and FEV1 increased in all patients (median 0.7 litres, range 0.1-1.8 litres, p < 0.0001). In 8 patients, stents had to be repositioned or reinserted, in 19 patients only one insertion and one removal procedure were necessary. One patient suffered a serious complication with haemorrhage and pneumonectomy, 3 patients had minor airway wall injuries resolving spontaneously. Six patients died with the stents from causes not related to the airway complications. Twenty-five stents could be removed after a median of 6 months (range 1-22) in 21 patients, and 22 airways remained patent. Median FEV1 was 2.3 litres immediately after stent removal, and remained 2.3 litres after 24 months. Conclusion: Stenotic airway complications after lung transplantation can be successfully treated with silicone stents, which can ultimately be removed, leaving a patent airway. Copyright (C) 2012 S. Karger AG, Basel

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available