Cargando…

The lung allocation score could evaluate allocation systems in countries that do not use the score

BACKGROUND: Evaluating allocation system effects on lung transplantation and determining systemic flaws is difficult. The purpose of this study was to assess the Korean urgency-based lung allocation system using the lung allocation score. METHODS: We reviewed transplantation patients retrospectively...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Yu, Woo Sik, Suh, Jee Won, Song, Seung Hwan, Paik, Hyo Chae, Kim, Song Yee, Park, Moo Suk, Lee, Jin Gu
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6447215/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30943262
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0214853
_version_ 1783408475137638400
author Yu, Woo Sik
Suh, Jee Won
Song, Seung Hwan
Paik, Hyo Chae
Kim, Song Yee
Park, Moo Suk
Lee, Jin Gu
author_facet Yu, Woo Sik
Suh, Jee Won
Song, Seung Hwan
Paik, Hyo Chae
Kim, Song Yee
Park, Moo Suk
Lee, Jin Gu
author_sort Yu, Woo Sik
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Evaluating allocation system effects on lung transplantation and determining systemic flaws is difficult. The purpose of this study was to assess the Korean urgency-based lung allocation system using the lung allocation score. METHODS: We reviewed transplantation patients retrospectively. Candidates were classified into groups based on urgency. Status 0 designated hospitalized patients requiring ventilator and/or extracorporeal life support. The lung allocation score was calculated based on the recipient’s condition at transplantation. RESULTS: One-hundred-twenty-three Status 0, 1, and 2/3 patients (40, 71, and 12, respectively) were enrolled. The median waiting time was 68 days. Nineteen Status 0 patients who received lung transplants deteriorated from non-Status 0 (median, 64 days). The lung allocation score showed a bimodal distribution (peaks around 45 and 90, corresponding with non-Status 0 and Status 0, respectively). Status 0 and the lung allocation score were independent risk factors for poor survival after adjustment for confounders (Status 0, hazard ratio, 2.788, p = 0.001; lung allocation score, hazard ratio, 1.025, p < 0.001). The lung allocation score cut-off for survival was 44. On dividing the non-Status 0 patients into 2 groups using the cut-off values and regrouping into Status 0, non-Status 0 with high lung allocation score (> 44), and non-Status 0 with low lung allocation score (< 44), we observed that non-Status 0 with high lung allocation score patients had better survival than Status 0 patients (p = 0.020) and poorer survival than non-Status 0 with low lung allocation score patients (p = 0.018). CONCLUSIONS: The LAS demonstrated the characteristics of LTx recipients in Korea and the Korean allocation system needs to be revised to reduce the number of patients receiving LTx in Status 0. The LAS system could be used as a tool to evaluate lung allocation systems in countries that do not use the LAS system.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6447215
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-64472152019-04-17 The lung allocation score could evaluate allocation systems in countries that do not use the score Yu, Woo Sik Suh, Jee Won Song, Seung Hwan Paik, Hyo Chae Kim, Song Yee Park, Moo Suk Lee, Jin Gu PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND: Evaluating allocation system effects on lung transplantation and determining systemic flaws is difficult. The purpose of this study was to assess the Korean urgency-based lung allocation system using the lung allocation score. METHODS: We reviewed transplantation patients retrospectively. Candidates were classified into groups based on urgency. Status 0 designated hospitalized patients requiring ventilator and/or extracorporeal life support. The lung allocation score was calculated based on the recipient’s condition at transplantation. RESULTS: One-hundred-twenty-three Status 0, 1, and 2/3 patients (40, 71, and 12, respectively) were enrolled. The median waiting time was 68 days. Nineteen Status 0 patients who received lung transplants deteriorated from non-Status 0 (median, 64 days). The lung allocation score showed a bimodal distribution (peaks around 45 and 90, corresponding with non-Status 0 and Status 0, respectively). Status 0 and the lung allocation score were independent risk factors for poor survival after adjustment for confounders (Status 0, hazard ratio, 2.788, p = 0.001; lung allocation score, hazard ratio, 1.025, p < 0.001). The lung allocation score cut-off for survival was 44. On dividing the non-Status 0 patients into 2 groups using the cut-off values and regrouping into Status 0, non-Status 0 with high lung allocation score (> 44), and non-Status 0 with low lung allocation score (< 44), we observed that non-Status 0 with high lung allocation score patients had better survival than Status 0 patients (p = 0.020) and poorer survival than non-Status 0 with low lung allocation score patients (p = 0.018). CONCLUSIONS: The LAS demonstrated the characteristics of LTx recipients in Korea and the Korean allocation system needs to be revised to reduce the number of patients receiving LTx in Status 0. The LAS system could be used as a tool to evaluate lung allocation systems in countries that do not use the LAS system. Public Library of Science 2019-04-03 /pmc/articles/PMC6447215/ /pubmed/30943262 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0214853 Text en © 2019 Yu et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Yu, Woo Sik
Suh, Jee Won
Song, Seung Hwan
Paik, Hyo Chae
Kim, Song Yee
Park, Moo Suk
Lee, Jin Gu
The lung allocation score could evaluate allocation systems in countries that do not use the score
title The lung allocation score could evaluate allocation systems in countries that do not use the score
title_full The lung allocation score could evaluate allocation systems in countries that do not use the score
title_fullStr The lung allocation score could evaluate allocation systems in countries that do not use the score
title_full_unstemmed The lung allocation score could evaluate allocation systems in countries that do not use the score
title_short The lung allocation score could evaluate allocation systems in countries that do not use the score
title_sort lung allocation score could evaluate allocation systems in countries that do not use the score
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6447215/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30943262
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0214853
work_keys_str_mv AT yuwoosik thelungallocationscorecouldevaluateallocationsystemsincountriesthatdonotusethescore
AT suhjeewon thelungallocationscorecouldevaluateallocationsystemsincountriesthatdonotusethescore
AT songseunghwan thelungallocationscorecouldevaluateallocationsystemsincountriesthatdonotusethescore
AT paikhyochae thelungallocationscorecouldevaluateallocationsystemsincountriesthatdonotusethescore
AT kimsongyee thelungallocationscorecouldevaluateallocationsystemsincountriesthatdonotusethescore
AT parkmoosuk thelungallocationscorecouldevaluateallocationsystemsincountriesthatdonotusethescore
AT leejingu thelungallocationscorecouldevaluateallocationsystemsincountriesthatdonotusethescore
AT yuwoosik lungallocationscorecouldevaluateallocationsystemsincountriesthatdonotusethescore
AT suhjeewon lungallocationscorecouldevaluateallocationsystemsincountriesthatdonotusethescore
AT songseunghwan lungallocationscorecouldevaluateallocationsystemsincountriesthatdonotusethescore
AT paikhyochae lungallocationscorecouldevaluateallocationsystemsincountriesthatdonotusethescore
AT kimsongyee lungallocationscorecouldevaluateallocationsystemsincountriesthatdonotusethescore
AT parkmoosuk lungallocationscorecouldevaluateallocationsystemsincountriesthatdonotusethescore
AT leejingu lungallocationscorecouldevaluateallocationsystemsincountriesthatdonotusethescore