4.6 Article

Impact of anastomosis time during lung transplantation on primary graft dysfunction

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION
卷 22, 期 5, 页码 1418-1429

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/ajt.16957

关键词

anastomosis time; implantation; ischemic time; lung transplantation; primary graft dysfunction; surgical technique

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study identifies anastomosis time (AT) as an independent risk factor for the development of primary graft dysfunction (PGD) post-lung transplantation (LTx). It suggests that shortening the implantation time and cooling the lung may decrease PGD-related morbidity and mortality.
Primary graft dysfunction (PGD) is a major obstacle after lung transplantation (LTx), associated with increased early morbidity and mortality. Studies in liver and kidney transplantation revealed prolonged anastomosis time (AT) as an independent risk factor for impaired short- and long-term outcomes. We investigated if AT during LTx is a risk factor for PGD. In this retrospective single-center cohort study, we included all first double lung transplantations between 2008 and 2016. The association of AT with any PGD grade 3 (PGD3) within the first 72 h post-transplant was analyzed by univariable and multivariable logistic regression analysis. Data on AT and PGD was available for 427 patients of which 130 (30.2%) developed PGD3. AT was independently associated with the development of any PGD3 <= 72 h in uni- (odds ratio [OR] per 10 min 1.293, 95% confidence interval [CI 1.136-1.471], p < .0001) and multivariable (OR 1.205, 95% CI [1.022-1.421], p = .03) logistic regression analysis. There was no evidence that the relation between AT and PGD3 differed between lung recipients from donation after brain death versus donation after circulatory death donors. This study identified AT as an independent risk factor for the development of PGD3 post-LTx. We suggest that the implantation time should be kept short and the lung cooled to decrease PGD-related morbidity and mortality post-LTx.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据