| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- Bergenfeldt, Henrik, et al.
(författare)
-
Donor-recipient size matching and mortality in heart transplantation : Influence of body mass index and gender
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation. - : Elsevier BV. - 1053-2498. ; 36:9, s. 940-947
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: The International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation (ISHLT) guidelines advise against inappropriate weight match (IWM) for heart transplant, defined as donor weight <70% of recipient's weight. Few studies have explored in detail this size-matching recommendation, especially with regard to body mass index (BMI) and gender matching. We aimed to determine whether any difference could be observed between size-matching in obese and non-obese recipients with regard to mortality after cardiac transplantation. Methods: Data from 52,455 adult heart transplants (recipients ≥18 years of age) between 1994 and 2013 were obtained from the ISHLT Registry. We defined the following subgroups of patients based on BMI: underweight, BMI <18.5; non-obese, BMI 18.5 to 30; and obese, BMI >30. The end-points were all-cause 30-day mortality and cumulative mortality. Results: IWM was associated with increased 30-day mortality (odds ratio [OR] = 1.20, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01 to 1.43, p = 0.041) and cumulative mortality (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.14, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.22, p < 0.001). In non-obese recipients, IWM was associated with increased 30-day mortality (OR = 1.89, 95% CI 1.48 to 2.41, p < 0.001) as well as cumulative mortality (HR = 1.27, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.41, p < 0.001), whereas, for obese recipients, IWM was not associated with 30-day or cumulative mortality. Male recipients of female allografts (HR = 1.08, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.12, p < 0.001) as well as female recipients of male allografts (HR = 1.07, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.13, p = 0.003) had increased cumulative mortality compared with gender-matched transplants. There was no interaction between IWM and gender mismatch. Conclusions: Our results indicate that donor weight <70% of recipient weight increases mortality in non-obese heart transplant recipients, but not in obese transplant recipients. Gender mismatch increases mortality independently of weight match.
|
|
| 3. |
- Bergenfeldt, Henrik, et al.
(författare)
-
Outcomes after ABO-incompatible heart transplantation in adults: A registry study.
- 2015
-
Ingår i: The Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation. - : Elsevier BV. - 1557-3117 .- 1053-2498. ; 34:7, s. 892-898
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- In the past, ABO incompatibility was considered an absolute contraindication to heart transplantation (HT) in adults. Advances in ABO-incompatible HT in pediatric patients and ABO-incompatible abdominal transplantation in adult patients have led to clinical exploration of intentional ABO-incompatible HT in adults. However, it is not well known how outcomes in ABO-incompatible adult heart transplant recipients compare with outcomes in ABO-compatible recipients.
|
|
| 4. |
- Bergenfeldt, Henrik, et al.
(författare)
-
Time-dependent prognostic effects of recipient and donor age in adult heart transplantation
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation. - : Elsevier BV. - 1053-2498. ; 38:2, s. 174-183
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Recipient age and donor age are well-known prognostic factors in adult heart transplantation. However, the association between donor age and recipient age and their interaction and short- and long-term mortality is unknown. METHODS: We studied 64,354 heart transplants to adult recipients between 1988 and 2013 in the ISHLT Registry. Donor age and recipient age were analyzed as continuous and categorical variables and restricted cubic spline functions to assess non-linear associations and interactions. The end-point was all-cause mortality. RESULTS: In the multivariable analysis, the odds ratio for 30-day mortality per 10-year increase in recipient age was 1.05 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01 to 1.08, p = 0.009) compared with 1.19 (95% CI 1.15 to 1.22, p < 0.001) for donor age. In the first year, the hazard ratio for mortality was 1.05 (95% CI 1.02 to 1.07, p < 0.001) for a 10-year increase in recipient age and 1.16 (1.14 to 1.18, p < 0.001) for donor age. In Years 1 to 3, 3 to 5, and 5 to 10 post-transplant, the hazard ratio was 0.89 (95% CI 0.86 to 0.92, p < 0.001), 0.98 (95% CI 0.94 to 1.02, p = 0.266), and 1.14 (95% CI 1.11 to 1.17, p < 0.001) for recipient age, and 1.12 (95% CI 1.08 to 1.14, p < 0.001), 1.07 (95% CI 1.03 to 1.10, p < 0.001), and 1.07 (95% CI 1.05 to 1.10, p < 0.001) for donor age, respectively. There was no interaction of recipient age and donor age with survival at any follow-up time-point. CONCLUSIONS: At 30 days, both higher donor age and recipient age were associated with higher mortality. At 1 to 10 years, older donor age was associated with higher mortality at all follow-up time-points, but the hazard was greater in the short term, and recipient age was associated only with longer term mortality. The risk from donor age appears equal across recipient age groups.
|
|
