Comparative outcome of double lung transplantation using conventional donor lungs and non-acceptable donor lungs reconditioned ex vivo.

A method to evaluate and recondition lungs ex vivo has been tested on donor lungs that have been rejected for transplantation. In the present paper, we compare early postoperative course between the six patients who received reconditioned lungs and the patients who received conventional donor lungs during the same period of time. During 2006 and 2007, a total of 21 patients underwent double sequential lung transplantation at the University Hospital of Lund. Six of those patients received reconditioned lungs. The other 15 patients received conventional donor lungs for transplantation without reconditioning ex vivo. The results are presented as median and interquartile range. Time in intensive care unit (days) between recipients of reconditioned lungs [13 (5-24) days], and recipients of conventional donor lungs [7 (5-12) days], P=0.44. Total hospital stay after transplantation (days) between recipients of reconditioned lungs [52 (47-60) days] and recipients of conventional donor lungs [44 (37-48) days], P=0.9. Ex vivo lung evaluation and reconditioning might not prolong early postoperative course in double lung transplantation. However, given the small number of patients, there might be a failure to detect a difference between the two groups. Keywords: Double lung transplantation; Reconditioned lungs; Clinical outcome.