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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |