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
. 2020 May;33(5):544-554.
doi: 10.1111/tri.13582. Epub 2020 Feb 13.

Impact of donor lung quality on post-transplant recipient outcome in the Lung Allocation Score era in Eurotransplant - a historical prospective study

Affiliations

Impact of donor lung quality on post-transplant recipient outcome in the Lung Allocation Score era in Eurotransplant - a historical prospective study

Jacqueline M Smits et al. Transpl Int. 2020 May.

Abstract

The aim of this study was to investigate whether there is an impact of donation rates on the quality of lungs used for transplantation and whether donor lung quality affects post-transplant outcome in the current Lung Allocation Score era. All consecutive adult LTx performed in Eurotransplant (ET) between January 2012 and December 2016 were included (N = 3053). Donors used for LTx in countries with high donation rate were younger (42% vs. 33% ≤45 years, P < 0.0001), were less often smokers (35% vs. 46%, P < 0.0001), had more often clear chest X-rays (82% vs. 72%, P < 0.0001), had better donor oxygenation ratios (20% vs. 26% with PaO2 /FiO2 ≤ 300 mmHg, P < 0.0001), and had better lung donor score values (LDS; 28% vs. 17% with LDS = 6, P < 0.0001) compared with donors used for LTx in countries with low donation rate. Survival rates for the groups LDS = 6 and ≥7 at 5 years were 69.7% and 60.9% (P = 0.007). Lung donor quality significantly impacts on long-term patient survival. Countries with a low donation rate are more oriented to using donor lungs with a lesser quality compared to countries with a high donation rate. Instead of further stretching donor eligibility criteria, the full potential of the donor pool should be realized.

Keywords: donation; donor; expanded donor pool; lung clinical; outcome.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have no conflict of interest to disclose.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Donation rates per million population of used diseased donor lungs, by year, by donor country.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Proportion of lung‐only transplants by lung donor score over time.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Proportion of lung‐only transplants by donor age over time.
Figure 4
Figure 4
(a) Proportion of lung‐only transplants by donor X‐ray classes over time. (b) Proportion of lung‐only transplants by donor bronchoscopy classes over time. (c) Proportion of lung‐only transplants by donor PaO2/FiO2 classes over time. (d) Proportion of lung‐only transplants by donor smoking status over time.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Post‐transplant survival by lung donor score [LDS = 6 (N = 638) dark blue line and LDS ≥7 (N = 2415) light green line].

References

    1. Annual Report 2018. http://www.eurotransplant.org.
    1. Van Raemdonck D, Neyrinck A, Verleden GM, et al Lung donor selection and management. Proc Am Thorac Soc 2009; 6: 28. - PubMed
    1. Somers J, Ruttens D, Verleden SE, et al A decade of extended‐criteria lung donors in a single center: was it justified? Transplant Int 2015; 28: 170. - PubMed
    1. https://www.government.nl/topics/organ-tissue-donation/new-donor-act-act... (assessed May 19, 2019).
    1. Egan TM, Murray S, Bustami RT, et al Development of the new lung allocation system in the United States. Am J Transplant 2006; 6: 1212. - PubMed