Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Loma Linda University Medical Center, Loma Linda, California.
Research Consulting Group, School of Public Health, Loma Linda University Medical Center, Loma Linda, California.
Ann Thorac Surg. 2019 Sep;108(3):744-748. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2019.03.042. Epub 2019 Apr 12.
We examined the effect of cold ischemic interval on modern outcomes to determine whether advances in patient management have made an impact.
Using the United Network of Organ Sharing database, we reviewed adult heart transplants between January 2000 and March 2016. We divided donor age into terciles: younger than 18 years, 18 to 33 years, and 34 years and older. Within each tercile, transplants were divided by cold ischemic interval of less than 4 hours, 4 to 6 hours, and more than 6 hours. Survival curves were compared between cold ischemic interval categories within each tercile. Covariate-adjusted and donor age-stratified Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to estimate overall mortality and graft failure hazards ratios.
Of 29,192 transplants, no significant differences between cold ischemic interval groups in survival or graft failure were apparent in the group aged younger than 18. For donors older than 18, significant differences were found for survival and graft failure with cold ischemic interval exceeding 4 hours in both univariate and multivariate analysis, and survival functions at different ischemic intervals continued to diverge beyond 1 year. The interaction effect between donor age and cold ischemic interval on overall mortality was not significant when analyzed as continuous variables, however younger donor age appeared to attenuate increase in overall mortality with longer cold ischemic intervals.
Despite advances in perioperative management during the past 30 years, for donors older than 18 years, cold ischemic interval exceeding 4 hours is associated with gradual but significantly diminished survival that persists well beyond the perioperative period. Comparison to historical data suggests that advances in management have somewhat attenuated the hazard associated with longer ischemic times.
我们研究了冷缺血时间对现代结果的影响,以确定患者管理的进步是否产生了影响。
我们使用美国器官共享网络数据库,回顾了 2000 年 1 月至 2016 年 3 月期间的成人心脏移植。我们将供体年龄分为三分之一:小于 18 岁、18 至 33 岁和 34 岁及以上。在每个三分之一中,根据冷缺血时间小于 4 小时、4 至 6 小时和大于 6 小时将移植分为不同组。在每个三分之一中,比较了冷缺血时间组之间的生存曲线。使用协变量调整和供体年龄分层 Cox 比例风险回归模型来估计总死亡率和移植物衰竭风险比。
在 29192 例移植中,在小于 18 岁的组中,冷缺血时间组之间的生存或移植物衰竭无显著差异。对于年龄大于 18 岁的供体,在单变量和多变量分析中,冷缺血时间超过 4 小时与生存和移植物衰竭均存在显著差异,并且在 1 年以上的不同缺血时间间隔的生存功能继续分化。当作为连续变量分析时,供体年龄和冷缺血时间对总死亡率的交互作用不显著,但供体年龄较年轻似乎减轻了较长冷缺血时间导致的总死亡率增加。
尽管在过去 30 年中围手术期管理取得了进展,但对于年龄大于 18 岁的供体,冷缺血时间超过 4 小时与逐渐但显著降低的生存相关,这种情况在围手术期后仍然持续。与历史数据相比,管理的进步在一定程度上减轻了与较长缺血时间相关的危险。