Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 20, 2026
Left Lung Orthotopic Transplantation in a Juvenile Porcine Model for ESLP
Published on: February 14, 2022
Utilization of the organ care system for bilateral lung transplantation: preliminary results of a comparative study
Mohamed Zeriouh1, Anton Sabashnikov2, Prashant N Mohite3
1Department of Cardiothoracic Transplantation and Mechanical Circulatory Support, Royal Brompton & Harefield NHS Foundation Trust, Harefield Hospital, Middlesex, UK Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, University Hospital of Cologne, Cologne, Germany zeriouh@web.de.
Objectives:
Lung transplantation (LTx) remains the gold standard for patients with end-stage lung disease. However, due to donor organ shortage and brain stem death-related lung injury, only a small proportion of lungs are used increasing the mortality rate on the waiting list. A portable normothermic continuous ex vivo perfusion using the organ care system (OCS) represents one of the tools to increase the pool of donor organs and to improve the function of marginal lungs. We sought to assess mid-term outcomes after LTx using OCS and to compare outcomes including overall survival and freedom from bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome (BOS) with those after conventional preservation.
Methods:
Included were 322 consecutive LTx performed at Harefield Hospital between January 2007 and December 2014. Recipients were divided into two groups depending on the organ storage strategy: the majority of patients (n = 308) were transplanted using lungs after cold storage (cold storage group), whereas 14 organs were preserved using OCS (OCS group). The primary end-points were overall survival and freedom from BOS after LTx. The secondary end-points were perioperative clinical characteristics and adverse events.
Results:
There were no statistically significant differences in terms of most baseline donor and recipient characteristics. The percentage of heavy smokers among donors [8 (2.9%) vs 6 (42.9%), P < 0.001] and the median number of pack-years smoked by donors [14 (7;24) vs 25 (24;30), P = 0.026] were statistically higher in the OCS group. Patients from the OCS group had significantly better postoperative FEV1 at 3 [69 (54;86) vs 93 (87;89), P < 0.001] and 6 [77 (60;90) vs 94 (84;100), P = 0.006] months. There were no statistically significant differences in terms of cumulative survival and freedom from BOS between the two groups.
Conclusions:
Results after LTx using OCS are acceptable with excellent survival, and superior early outcome in terms of postoperative lung function despite higher risk in the OCS group. Further larger prospective trials are warranted to confirm our preliminary results and to elaborate long-term outcomes.
