Living-donor lobar lung transplantation (LDLLT) is one of the final options for saving patients with pulmonary complications after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). We retrospectively investigated 19 patients who had undergone LDLLT after HSCT in Japan. Eight patients underwent LDLLT after HSCT in which one of the donors was the same living donor as in HSCT (SD group), while 11 received LDLLT from relatives who were not the HSCT donors (non-SD group). In the SD group, three patients underwent single LDLLT. The 5-year survival rate was 100% and 58% in the SD and non-SD groups, respectively. In the SD group, postoperative immunosuppression was significantly lower than in the non-SD group. Two patients died of infection and one died of post-transplant lymphoproliferative disease (PTLD) in the non-SD group, while only one patient died of PTLD 7 years after LDLLT in the SD group. Hematologic malignancy relapsed in two patients in the non-SD group. For the three single LDLLTs in the SD group, immunosuppression was carefully tapered. In our study, LDLLT involving the same donor as for HSCT appeared to have advantages related to lower immunosuppression compared to LDLLT from relatives who were not the HSCT donors.
Adult recipients frequently withdraw from livingdonor lobar lung transplantation because of the small size of donor grafts. The right lower lobe is 120% larger than the left lower lobe. We developed a novel surgical technique in which an inverted right lower lobe graft can be transplanted into the left thorax. The first patient was a 43-year-old woman with end-stage idiopathic interstitial pneumonia. Her husband was the only eligible donor for living-donor lobar lung transplantation. His right lower lobe was estimated to provide 45% of the recipient's predicted forced vital capacity, which would provide the borderline function required for living-donor lobar lung transplantation. Since lung perfusion scintigraphy of the recipient showed a right-to-left ratio of 64:36, transplanting the right lower lobe graft into the left thorax and sparing the native right lung was considered the only treatment option. We simulated this procedure using three-dimensional models produced by a three-dimensional printer. In living-donor lobar lung transplantation, all anastomoses were performed smoothly as planned preoperatively. Because of the initial success, this procedure was performed successfully in two additional patients. This procedure enables larger grafts to be transplanted, potentially solving critical size matching problems in livingdonor lobar lung transplantation.
The success of living‐donor lobar lung transplantation (LDLLT) largely depends on donor outcome; but to date, no authors have studied health‐related quality of life (HRQOL) of donors. We prospectively evaluated multidimensional outcomes before and 1 year after donor lobectomies. Patient‐reported HRQOL, dyspnea, psychological status and sleep quality, and physiological pulmonary function were determined. All donors were alive without any limitations in their activities of daily living after 1 year. Postoperative pulmonary function was better than the estimated preoperative values; but, with respect to HRQOL, four of the eight subscales of the Medical Outcomes Study 36‐item short form (SF‐36) deteriorated significantly after donation. In addition, dyspnea assessed by the modified Medical Research Council scale also worsened significantly. In contrast, postoperative anxiety assessed by the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale significantly improved from baseline. The donors whose recipients died reported lower SF‐36 scores with worsening sleep quality measured by Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index. Thus, although postoperative pulmonary functions in donors were preserved, their HRQOL and dyspnea deteriorated postoperatively. Moreover, HRQOL and sleep quality were impaired in recipients who experienced poor outcomes. To capture the comprehensive outcomes in LDLLT donors after donation, patient‐reported outcomes should be analyzed separately from physiological outcomes.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.