Maximizing Heart Transplant Success: Histopathological Insights From Utilization Of Organ Care System For Extended Procurement Distance

Ameesh Isath,Suguru Ohira,Vasiliki Gregory,Avi Levine,Stephen Pan,Gregg Lanier,Chhaya Aggarwal,Kevin Wolfe,David Spielvogel,Masashi Kai,Alan Gass
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cardfail.2023.10.037
IF: 6.592
2024-01-01
Journal of Cardiac Failure
Abstract:Introduction The utilization of the Organ Care System (OCS) (Transmedics, Andover, MA) has enabled extension of ex-situ intervals for ex-vivo organ perfusion of the heart allowing for expansion of the limited donor pool to include extended distances. We aimed to compare outcomes and histopathological differences in the utilization of OCS and conventional cold storage technique for donor heart preservation. Methods We reviewed consecutive donation after brain death cardiac recipients at our center from May 2022 to January 2023. Patients were stratified into two groups: OCS vs cold storage (Control). The first endomyocardial biopsy of the donor hearts was compared for histopathological differences. The indication for OCS use was an expected ischemic time >4 hours. Results A total of 26 patients received heart transplantation during this period, 10 utilizing OCS and 16 using conventional cold storage. Baseline characteristics were comparable (Table 1). The utilization of OCS allowed for a significant increase in distance traveled for heart recovery (OCS, 764±352 vs Control, 207±176 miles, p <0.001), with a higher mean total preservation time (6.2±0.9 vs 2.6±0.6, p<0.001) (Figure 1). None of the patients in the OCS group required new veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support following transplant (0% vs n=1(6.2%), p=0.32). Both groups had a similar incidence of primary graft dysfunction (OCS n=1(10%) vs control n=3(18.7%)), p=0.55). There was 100% in-hospital survival in the OCS group compared to 93.7% in the control group (p=0.21). The mean ICU length of stay was also similar in both groups. Histopathology was available in 25 (96%) of patients and was obtained within 8.2±2.9 days of transplant (Table 1). Ischemic injury identified on pathology was similar in both groups (OCS n=1(10%) vs control n=1(6.7%), p=0.71). The total perfusion time and cold ischemic time for both patients with ischemic injury was similar to that of the respective cohorts. Conclusion Despite a mean preservation time of ∼6 hours and travel distance of more than 700 miles, we had excellent short term outcomes with no increase in ischemic injury on histopathology. OCS can safely augment the number of potential organs, expanding the donor pool without compromising outcomes. Our study is also the first to analyze histopathological outcomes after utilization of OCS.
cardiac & cardiovascular systems
What problem does this paper attempt to address?