共查询到17条相似文献，搜索用时 0 毫秒
1.
2.
Hiroshi Date Akihiro Aoyama Kyoko Hijiya Hideki Motoyama Tomohiro Handa Hideyuki Kinoshita Shiro Baba Toshiyuki Mizota Kenji Minakata Toyofumi F. Chen-Yoshikawa 《The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery》2017,153(2):479-486
Objectives
In standard living-donor lobar lung transplantation (LDLLT), the right and left lower lobes from 2 healthy donors are implanted. Because of the difficulty encountered in finding 2 donors with ideal size matching, various transplant procedures have been developed in our institution. The purpose of this retrospective study was to compare outcomes of nonstandard LDLLT with standard LDLLT.Methods
Between June 2008 and January 2016, we performed 65 LDLLTs for critically ill patients. Functional size matching was performed by estimating graft forced vital capacity based on the donor's measured forced vital capacity and the number of pulmonary segments implanted. For anatomical size matching, 3-dimensional computed tomography volumetry was performed. In cases of oversize mismatch, single-lobe transplant or downsizing transplant was performed. In cases of undersize mismatch, native upper lobe sparing transplant or right-left inverted transplant was performed. In right-left inverted transplants, the donor's right lower lobe was inverted and implanted into the recipient's left chest cavity.Results
Twenty-nine patients (44.6%) received nonstandard LDLLT, including 12 single-lobe transplants, 7 native upper lobe sparing transplants, 6 right-left inverted transplants, 2 sparing + inverted transplants, and 2 others. Thirty-six patients (57.4%) received standard LDLLT. Three- and five-year survival rates were similar between the 2 groups (89.1% and 76.6% after nonstandard LDLLT vs 78.0% and 71.1% after standard LDLLT, P = .712).Conclusions
Various transplant procedures such as single, sparing and inverted transplants are valuable options when 2 donors with ideal size matching are not available for LDLLT. 相似文献3.
4.
5.
6.
Shen KR Wain JC Wright CD Grillo HC Mathisen DJ 《The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery》2008,135(6):1210-1219
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
Jose Luis Campo-Canaveral De La Cruz Ben Dunne Philippe Lemaitre Mindaugas Rackauskas Jiri Pozniak Yui Watanabe Andrea Mariscal Jonathan Yeung Kazuhiro Yasufuku Andrew Pierre Marc de Perrot Thomas K. Waddell Marcelo Cypel Shaf Keshavjee Laura Donahoe 《The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery》2021,161(5):1674-1685
ObjectivesLobar lung transplantation (LLTx) from deceased donors is a potential solution for donor–recipient size mismatch for small sized recipients. We reviewed our institutional experience to compare outcomes after LLTx to standard lung transplantation (LTx).MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed transplants in our institution from January 2000 to December 2017. LLTx early- and long-term outcomes were compared with LTx. Additional analysis of outcomes was performed after dividing the cohort into 2 eras (era 1, 2000-2012; era 2, 2013-2017).ResultsAmong the entire cohort (1665), 75 were LLTx (4.5%). Compared with LTx, LLTx were more frequently bridged to transplant with extracorporeal life support or mechanical ventilation and were transplanted in a rapidly deteriorating status (respectively, 20% vs 4.4%, P = .001; 22.7% vs 7.9, P < .001; and 41.3% vs 26.5%, P = .013). LLTx had longer intensive care unit and hospital lengths of stay (respectively, median 17 vs 4 days, and 45 vs 23, both P < .001), and greater 30-day mortality (13.3% vs 4.3%, P = .001) and 90-day mortality (17.3% vs 7.2%, P = .003). In era 2, despite a significantly greater 30-day mortality (10.8% vs 2.8%, P = .026), there was no significant difference in 90-day mortality between LLTx and LTx (13.5% vs 5.1%, P = .070). Overall survival at 1, 3, and 5 years was not significantly different between LLTx and LTx (73.2% vs 84.4%, 56.9% vs 68.4% and 50.4% vs 55.8, P = .088).ConclusionsAlthough LLTx is a high-risk procedure, both mid- and long-term survival are comparable with LTx in all cohorts in the modern era. LLTx therefore represents a valuable surgical option for small-sized recipients. 相似文献