Cedars-Sinai Heart Institute, Los Angeles, California, USA; Department of Surgery, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California, USA.
Cedars-Sinai Heart Institute, Los Angeles, California, USA.
J Heart Lung Transplant. 2017 Mar;36(3):258-263. doi: 10.1016/j.healun.2016.08.015. Epub 2016 Aug 20.
The Organ Care System, an ex-vivo heart perfusion platform, represents an alternative to the current standard of cold organ storage that sustains the donor heart in a near-physiologic state. It is unknown whether using the Organ Care System influences 2-year outcomes after heart transplantation. We reviewed our institutional experience to compare 2-year outcomes for patients randomized to the Organ Care System or standard cold storage.
Between 2011 and 2013, heart transplant candidates from a single tertiary-care medical center enrolled within the PROCEED II trial were randomized to either standard cold storage or the Organ Care System. Outcomes assessed included 2-year survival, freedom from cardiac allograft vasculopathy (CAV), non-fatal major cardiac events (NF-MACE), biopsy-proven cellular rejection (CMR) and biopsy-proven antibody-mediated rejection (AMR).
Thirty-eight patients were randomized to the Organ Care System (n = 19) or cold storage group (n = 19). There was no significant difference in 2-year patient survival (Organ Care System: 72.2%; cold storage: 81.6%; p = 0.38). Similarly, there were no differences in freedom from CAV, NF-MACE, CMR or AMR. The Organ Care System group had significantly longer total ischemia time (361 ± 96 minutes vs 207 ± 50 minutes; p < 0.001) and shorter cold ischemia time (134 ± 45 minutes vs 207 ± 50 minutes; p < 0.001) compared with the cold storage group.
The Organ Care System did not appear to be associated with significant differences in intermediate results compared with conventional strategies. These results suggest that this ex-vivo allograft perfusion system is a promising and valid platform for donor heart transportation.
器官保存系统是一种离体心脏灌注平台,代表了目前冷保存器官标准的替代方法,可使供心处于近生理状态。目前尚不清楚使用器官保存系统是否会影响心脏移植后的 2 年结果。我们回顾了我们的机构经验,比较了使用器官保存系统和标准冷储存的患者的 2 年结果。
在 2011 年至 2013 年间,来自单一三级医疗中心的心脏移植候选者在 PROCEED II 试验中被随机分配到标准冷储存或器官保存系统。评估的结果包括 2 年生存率、无心脏移植物血管病(CAV)、非致命性主要心脏事件(NF-MACE)、组织学证实的细胞排斥(CMR)和组织学证实的抗体介导排斥(AMR)。
38 名患者被随机分配到器官保存系统(n = 19)或冷储存组(n = 19)。2 年患者生存率无显著差异(器官保存系统:72.2%;冷储存:81.6%;p = 0.38)。同样,在无 CAV、NF-MACE、CMR 或 AMR 方面也没有差异。器官保存系统组的总缺血时间明显较长(361 ± 96 分钟 vs 207 ± 50 分钟;p < 0.001),冷缺血时间较短(134 ± 45 分钟 vs 207 ± 50 分钟;p < 0.001)与冷储存组相比。
与传统策略相比,器官保存系统在中间结果方面似乎没有显著差异。这些结果表明,这种离体供体心脏灌注系统是一种有前途和有效的供体心脏运输平台。