The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery · 2026
The effect of a 2-surgeon review system on donor offers in lung transplantation at a high-volume center.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Gil-Barturen Mariana, Yamamoto Haruchika, Pessoa Bernardo M, Da Silva Natercia, Wakeam Elliot, Yeung Jonathan C, Pierre Andrew, de Perrot Marc, Yasufuku Kazuhiro, Waddell Thomas K, Shelton Colleen, Donahoe Laura, Keshavjee Shaf, Cypel Marcelo
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: In an effort to enhance donor lung use, our center implemented a 2-surgeon review system whereby donor lungs declined by the primary on-call surgeon are reassessed by a second surgeon. We evaluated the impact of this model on transplant volume and clinical outcomes.
METHODS: A single-center retrospective review was conducted of recipients of lung transplant between August 2022 and September 2024. Outcomes were compared between recipients receiving lungs initially accepted and those accepted after second review. Primary end points included primary graft dysfunction grade 3 at 72 hours, postoperative extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, time to extubation, length of stay, and survival.
RESULTS: During the 2-year study period, 428 lung transplants were performed; 34 (8%) used donors accepted after second review. Among 880 initially declined offers, 57 were accepted and 34 transplanted. Ex vivo lung perfusion use was similar between groups (38.2% vs 32.9%; P = .666). Donor and recipient characteristics were comparable. Rates of primary graft dysfunction grade 3 (11.8% vs 12.9%), postoperative extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (5.9% vs 5.3%), time to extubation (70 vs 52 hours), intensive care unit stay (6 vs 6 days), hospital stay (26 vs 23 days), and overall survival were similar between groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of this two-surgeon review system increased transplant volume by 8.6% without compromising early outcomes.
METHODS: A single-center retrospective review was conducted of recipients of lung transplant between August 2022 and September 2024. Outcomes were compared between recipients receiving lungs initially accepted and those accepted after second review. Primary end points included primary graft dysfunction grade 3 at 72 hours, postoperative extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, time to extubation, length of stay, and survival.
RESULTS: During the 2-year study period, 428 lung transplants were performed; 34 (8%) used donors accepted after second review. Among 880 initially declined offers, 57 were accepted and 34 transplanted. Ex vivo lung perfusion use was similar between groups (38.2% vs 32.9%; P = .666). Donor and recipient characteristics were comparable. Rates of primary graft dysfunction grade 3 (11.8% vs 12.9%), postoperative extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (5.9% vs 5.3%), time to extubation (70 vs 52 hours), intensive care unit stay (6 vs 6 days), hospital stay (26 vs 23 days), and overall survival were similar between groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of this two-surgeon review system increased transplant volume by 8.6% without compromising early outcomes.