Results in mediastinal lymph node staging of surgical lung cancer: Data from the prospective cohort of the Spanish Video-Assisted Thoracic Surgery Group.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to assess the diagnostic performance of combined computerised tomography (CT) and positron emission tomography (PET) in mediastinal staging of surgical lung cancer based on data obtained from the prospective cohort of the Spanish Group for Video-Assisted Thoracic Surgery (GEVATS). METHODS: A total of 2782 patients underwent surgery for primary lung carcinoma. We analysed diagnostic success in mediastinal lymph node staging (cN2) using CT and PET. Bivariate and multivariate analyses were performed of the factors involved in this success. The risk of unexpected pN2 disease was analysed for cases in which an invasive testing is recommended: cN1, the tumour centrally located or the tumour diameter >3 cm. RESULTS: The overall success of CT together with PET was 82.9% with a positive predictive value of 0.21 and negative predictive value of 0.93. If the tumour was larger than 3 cm and for each unit increase in mediastinal SUVmax, the probability of success was lower with OR 0.59 (0.44-0.79) and 0.71 (0.66-0.75), respectively. In the video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) approach, the probability of success was higher with OR 2.04 (1.52-2.73). The risk of unexpected pN2 increased with the risk factors cN1, the tumour centrally located or the tumour diameter >3 cm: from 4.5% (0 factors) to 18.8% (3 factors) but did not differ significantly as a function of whether invasive testing was performed. CONCLUSIONS: CT and PET together have a high negative predictive value. The overall success of the staging is lower in the case of tumours >3 cm and high mediastinal SUVmax, and it is higher when VATS is performed. The risk of unexpected pN2 is higher if the disease is cN1, the tumour centrally located or the tumour diameter >3 cm but does not vary significantly as a function of whether patients have undergone invasive testing.

Early lung retrieval from traumatic brain-dead donors does not compromise outcomes following lung transplantation.

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether lung retrieval from traumatic donors performed within 24 h of brain death has a negative impact on early graft function and survival after lung transplantation (LT), when compared with those retrieved after 24 h. METHODS: Review of lung transplants performed from traumatic donors over a 17-year period. Recipients were distributed into two groups: transplants from traumatic donor lungs retrieved within 24 h of brain death (Group A), and transplants from traumatic donor lungs retrieved after 24 h of brain death (Group B). Demographic data of donors and recipients, early graft function, perioperative complications and mortality were compared between both groups. RESULTS: Among 356 lung transplants performed at our institution, 132 were from traumatic donors (70% male, 30% female). Group A: 73 (55%); Group B: 59 (45%). There were 53 single, 77 double, and 2 combined LT. Indications were emphysema in 41 (31%), pulmonary fibrosis in 31 (23%), cystic fibrosis in 38 (29%), bronchiectasis in 9 (7%) and other indications in 13 patients (10%). Donor and recipient demographic data, need or cardiopulmonary bypass, postoperative complications and Intensive Care Unit and hospital stay did not differ between groups. Primary graft dysfunction (A vs B): 9 (16%) vs 13 (26%) P = 0.17. PaO2/FiO2 24 h post-transplant (A vs B): 303 mmHg vs 288 mmHg (P = 0.57). Number of acute rejection episodes (A vs B): 0.93 vs 1.49 (P = 0.01). Postoperative intubation time (A vs B): 99 vs 100 h (P = 0.99). 30-day mortality (A vs B): 7 (10%) vs 2 (3.5%) (P = 0.13). Freedom from bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome (A vs B): 82, 72, 37, 22 vs 78, 68, 42, 15%, at 3, 5, 10 and 15 years, respectively (P = 0.889). Survival (A vs B): 65, 54, 46, 42 and 27 vs 60, 50, 45, 43 and 29% at 3, 5, 7, 10 and 15 years, respectively (P = 0.937). CONCLUSIONS: In our experience, early lung retrieval after brain death from traumatic donors does not adversely affect early and long-term outcomes after LT.

Influence of donor-recipient gender mismatch on graft function and survival following lung transplantation.

OBJECTIVES: In current practice, donors and recipients are not matched for gender in lung transplantation. However, some data have suggested a possible effect of gender combinations on lung transplant outcomes. We examined whether donor-recipient (D/R) gender mismatch is related to adverse outcomes after lung transplantation in terms of early and long-term graft function and survival. METHODS: We reviewed 256 donors and lung transplant recipients over a 14-year period. Patients were distributed into four groups: Group A (D/R: female/female), Group B (D/R: male/male), Group C (D/R: female/male), Group D (D/R: male/female). Donor and recipient variables were compared among groups, including early graft function, 30-day mortality, freedom from bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome (BOS), and long-term survival. RESULTS: Group A: 57 (22%), Group B: 99 (39%), Group C: 62 (24%), Group D: 38 (15%) transplants (P = 0.001). Donor age was 29 ± 14, 27 ± 12, 33 ± 13 and 23 ± 12 years for Groups A, B, C and D, respectively (P = 0.004). Recipient age was 31 ± 15, 44 ± 17, 42 ± 16 and 30 ± 16 years for Groups A, B, C and D, respectively (P = 0.000). PaO2/FiO2 (mmHg) 24 h post-transplant was: Group A: 276 ± 144, Group B: 297 ± 131, Group C: 344 ± 133 and Group D: 238 ± 138 (P = 0.015). Primary graft dysfunction developed in 23, 14, 17 and 21% of recipients from Groups A, B, C and D, respectively (P = 0.45). Operative mortality was 4.4, 6.5, 5.2 and 2%, for recipients from Groups A, B, C and D, respectively (P = 0.66). Freedom from BOS was 73, 59 and 36% for gender-matched transplants vs 76, 67 and 40% for gender-mismatched transplants at 3, 5 and 10 years, respectively (P = 0.618), without differences among groups. A non-significant survival benefit was observed for female recipients, irrespective of the donor gender. CONCLUSIONS: Donor-recipient gender mismatch does not have a negative impact on early graft function and mortality following lung transplantation. There is a trend towards a survival benefit for female recipients, irrespective of the donor gender.

Assessment of lungs for transplantation: a stepwise analysis of 476 donors.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to assess the suitability rates and the causes of lung-donor refusal, to determine which factors could be improved to expand the donor pool available for transplantation (LTx). METHODS: Lung donors offered to our Lung Transplantation Unit from October 1993 to December 2007 were reviewed to assess the causes of unsuitability. The donor-lung evaluation was divided into three stages: stage 1 (PaO(2)/FiO(2) ratio, chest X-ray, bronchoscopic findings), stage 2 (donor-lung inspection and palpation) and stage 3 (assessment of grafts after harvesting). Variables from donors and recipients were analysed and compared between 1993-2001 (group A) and 2002-2007 (group B). An additional subgroup of extended donors was analysed to assess the recipient outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 476 lung donors were assessed (278 men and 198 women; mean age 29+/-13 years). Causes of death were trauma in 255, intracranial bleeding in 202 and others in 19. As many as 273 donors were suitable for LTx (57%; 162 double LTx and 111 single LTx). Acceptability rates were 68%, 58% and 57% at stages 1, 2 and 3, respectively, and were significantly higher in group B than in group A (overall: 64% vs 54%; stage 2: 91% vs 79%), with no changes in stages 1 and 3. Abnormal bronchoscopy precluded LTx in 79 cases (16%). Group B donors were older (p=0.000), ventilated longer (p=0.07) and with shorter ischaemic times (p=0.000) than group A. In the recipients, primary graft dysfunction (PGD) (17% vs 15%) and 30-day mortality (11% vs 6%) did not differ between both the groups. No differences were observed between extended and ideal donors in terms of recipient 30-day mortality (extended 6% vs ideal 9%; p=0.315) and development of PGD (extended 21% vs ideal 15%; p=0.342). CONCLUSIONS: Despite the high rate of organ donation in Spain, the acceptability rate remains low (57%), mainly due to failure to meet the criteria for acceptance at the early stages of donor-lung assessment. Improvements in multi-organ donor care must be made to expand the lung-donor pool. The use of extended donors does not seem to have a negative impact on recipient outcomes.