Background: The interest in donation after cardiocirculatory death (DCD) donors for lung transplantation (LT) has been recently rekindled due to lung allograft shortage. Clinical outcomes following DCD have proved satisfactory. The aim of this systematic review is to provide a thorough analysis of published experience regarding outcomes of LT after controlled DCD compared with donation after brain death (DBD) donors. Methods: We performed a literature search in Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, PubMed and Web of Science using the items "lung transplantation" AND "donation after circulatory death" on November 1, 2018. The full text of relevant articles was evaluated by two authors independently. Quality assessment was performed using the NIH protocol for case-control and case series studies. A pooled Odds ratio (OR) and mean differences with inverse variance weighting using DerSimonian-Laird random effect models were computed to account for between-trial variance (τ2). Results: Of the 508 articles identified with our search, 9 regarding controlled donation after cardiac death (cDCD) were included in the systematic review, including 2973 patients (403 who received graft from DCD and 2570 who had DBD). Both 1-year survival and 2 and 3-grade primary graft dysfunction (PGD) were balanced between the two cohorts (OR = 1.00 and 1.03 respectively); OR for airway complications was 2.07 against cDCD. We also report an OR = 0.57 for chronic lung allograft dysfunction (CLAD) and an OR = 0.57 for 5-year survival against cDCD. Conclusions: Our meta-analysis shows no significant difference between recipients after cDCD or DBD regarding 1-year survival, PGD and 1-year freedom from CLAD. Airway complications and long-term survival were both related with transplantation after cDCD, but these statistical associations need further research.

rejection. The 1 and 5 year cumulative probability of OS from recurrence were 100 and 43% (95%CI 12-74), respectively, with a median OS of 51 months (95%CI 24-78). Conclusion:Selected patients with isolated pulmonary HCC-recurrence after LT and with preserved hepatic function showed that a pulmonary metastasectomy could be efficacious in managing a PM-HCC and could give an opportunity for long-term survival.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has changed many aspects of our private and professional routine. In particular, the lockdowns have severely affected the entire healthcare system and hospital activities, forcing it to rethink the protocols in force. We suggest that this scenario, in spite of the new challenges involving so far complex healthcare providers, may lead to the unique opportunity to rethink pathways and management of patients. Indeed, having to resume institutional activity after a long interruption that has completely canceled the previously existing schemes, healthcare providers have the unique opportunity to overcome obsolete and “we have always done in this way” model on the wave of the general desire to resume a normal life. Furthermore, the pandemic has highlighted some flaws in our health system, highlighting those critical issues that most need to be addressed. This article is a review of pre-pandemic literature addressing the use of Lean Six Sigma (LSS) and standardization processes in thoracic surgery to improve efficiency. Our goal is to identify the main issues that could be successfully improved along the entire pathway of a patient from the first referral to diagnosis, hospitalization, and surgical operation up to convalescence. Furthermore, we aim to identify the standardization processes that have been implemented to achieve significant improvements in patient outcomes while reducing costs. The methods and goals that could be used in the near future to modernize our healthcare systems are drawn up from a careful reading and interpretation in light of the pandemic of the most significant review articles in the literature.

No abstract

No abstract