Common Criteria for Ex Vivo Lung Perfusion Have No Significant Impact on Posttransplant Outcomes

Abstract

Background: Although it is intense in health care resources, by facilitating assessment and reconditioning, ex vivo lung perfusion (EVLP) has the potential to expand the donor pool and improve lung transplant outcomes. However, inclusion criteria used in EVLP trials have not been validated.

Methods: This retrospective study from 2014 to 2018 reviewed our local state-based donation organization donor records as well as subsequent recipient outcomes to explore the relation between EVLP indications used in clinical trials and recipient outcomes. The primary outcome was primary graft dysfunction grade 3 at 24 hours, with 30-day mortality and posttransplant survival time as secondary outcomes, compared with univariate and multivariate analysis.

Results: From 705 lung donor referrals, 304 lung transplantations were performed (use rate of 42%); 212 of recipients (70%) met at least 1 of the commonly cited EVLP initiation criteria. There was no significant difference in primary graft dysfunction grade 3 or 30-day mortality between recipients with or without an EVLP indication (10.2% versus 7.8%, P = .51; and 2.4% versus 0%, P = .14, respectively). Multivariate analyses showed no significant relationship between commonly cited EVLP criteria and primary graft dysfunction grade 3 or survival time. Recipient outcomes were significantly associated with recipient diagnosis.

Conclusions: At least 1 commonly cited criterion for EVLP initiation was present in 70% of the transplanted donors, and yet it did not predict clinical results; acceptable outcomes were seen in both subgroups. To discover the true utility of EVLP beyond good clinical management and focus EVLP on otherwise unacceptable lungs, a reconsideration of EVLP inclusion criteria is required.