Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2015 May;34(5):675-84.
doi: 10.1016/j.healun.2014.11.009. Epub 2014 Nov 10.

Lung transplantation from donation after cardiocirculatory death: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Lung transplantation from donation after cardiocirculatory death: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Dustin Krutsinger et al. J Heart Lung Transplant. 2015 May.

Abstract

Background: Lung transplantation (LTx) can extend life expectancy and enhance the quality of life for select patients with end-stage lung disease. In the setting of donor lung shortage and waiting list mortality, the interest in donation after cardiocirculatory death (DCD) is increasing. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare outcomes between DCD and conventional donation after brain death (DBD).

Methods: PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Scopus, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched. We identified original research studies with 1-year post-transplant survival data involving >5 DCD transplants. We performed meta-analyses examining 1-year survival, primary graft dysfunction, and acute rejection after LTx.

Results: We identified 519 citations; 11 observational cohort studies met our inclusion criteria for systematic review, and 6 met our inclusion criteria for meta-analysis. There were no differences found in 1-year mortality after LTx between DCD and DBD cohorts in individual studies or in the meta-analysis (DCD [n = 271] vs DBD [n = 2,369], relative risk [RR] 0.88, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.59-1.31, p = 0.52, I(2) = 0%). There was also no difference between DCD and DBD in a pooled analysis of 5 studies reporting on primary graft dysfunction (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.68-1.73, p = 0.7, I(2) = 0%) and 4 studies reporting on acute rejection (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.49-1.05, p = 0.09, I(2) = 0%).

Conclusions: Survival after LTx from DCD is comparable to survival after LTx from DBD in observational cohort studies. DCD appears to be a safe and effective method to expand the donor pool.

Keywords: cardiocirculatory death; circulatory determination of death; donation after cardiac death; lung transplantation; non–heart-beating donor.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources