Transplant network
The rise in lung transplant for older patients
Over the past 20 years, there has been a dramatic increase in lung transplantation in elderly patients, with wide variability in age limit amongst transplant centers. The number of recipients over the age of 65 has risen from 6.9% in 2004 to 29.6% in 2016 in the United States, and 2.6% to 17% internationally. There is a number of factors driving this increase; the prevalence of advanced lung disease with increasing age, advances in targeted therapies to treat cystic fibrosis, an increased willingness of centers to perform transplants in older patients, and the 2005 revision of the Lung Allocation Scoring System (Courtwright A, Cantu E. J Thoracic Dis. 2017:9[9]:3346-51).
Dr. Melissa B. Lesko
In the past, outcomes posttransplant for elderly patients have been conflicting in single-center studies. More recently, Hayanga et al. found no difference in survival up to 1 year between individuals 60-69 and those over 70 (J Heart Lung Transplant. 2015;34[2]:182-88). Mosher et al., however, found the median survival dropped from 4.64 years for patients aged 65-69 to 3.07 years for patients ≥74 (J Heart Lung Transplant. 2021;40[1]:42-55). Notably, older recipients were more likely to be readmitted at 30 and 90 days, and more likely to be discharged to an inpatient rehabilitation facility following transplant (McCarthy et al. J Heart Lung Transplant. 2017;36:S115; Tang et al. Clin Transplant. 2015;29:581-587).
Dr. Grant Turner
The use of transplant in elderly patients comes with many concerns regarding neurocognitive status, frailty, and other comorbidities, all of which must be rigorously tested prior to consideration(Biswas R et al. Ann Thorac Surg. 2015;100:443-51). Recipient age, creatinine level, bilirubin level, steroid use at the time of transplant, and hospitalization at the time of transplant were associated with increased mortality (Mosher et al. J Heart Lung Transplant. 2021;40[1]:42-55). Further research is warranted in this evolving area.
Melissa B. Lesko, DO
Grant Turner, MD, MHA
Steering Committee Members
Women’s lung health
Will the new pulmonary hypertension hemodynamic classification temper the PH ‘sex-paradox’?
Older and contemporary PH registries have consistently shown that PH predominantly affects women ~2 to 3.5 times than men, with female patients having better survival compared with men (Kozu K et al. Heart Vessels. 2018;33[8]:93), a fact attributed to better RV function in female than male subjects. This PH sex-paradox denotes that while estrogen leads to increased susceptibility to PH, it appears to confer better outcomes after PH develops due to improved RV function, since RV dysfunction is a strong predictor of poor outcomes in PH. Multiple preclinical studies have described how estrogen provides protective effects on the RV (Cheng TC et al. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol. 2020;319:H1459; Frump AL et al. Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol. 2015;308:L873).
Dr. Lavannya Pandit
The recent recommended updates to the hemodynamic definition reflect acknowledgment of irrefutable evidence that even mildly elevated mPAP (between 19 and 24 mm Hg) is associated with increased morbidity and mortality based on consistent data from pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) as well as from other forms of PH [Simonneau G et al. Eur Respir J. 2019;(Jan 24);53(1):1801913). With incorporation of the updated definition that more accurately captures the disease state and its progression, an unaddressed question still remains as to how the new classification will change PH treatment algorithm and outcomes in women compared with men. Setting the definition of PH at a mPAP of 20 mm Hg not only better represents the typical patients with PH in practice, such as those with PH due to left-sided heart disease (Group 2) or PH associated with chronic lung disease (Group 3), but incorporates the preclinical pathologic disease state of PH, in which symptoms may not be evident (Maron BA, et al. Circulation. 2016;133:1240). In adhering to the new PH definition, will earlier diagnosis across the spectrum of all individuals with PH before RV dysfunction has developed improve outcomes for all those afflicted with PH and equalize outcomes between men and women? As future studies continue to investigate the direct effects of sex hormones on the RV and dissect the mechanisms leading to the sex differences in RV function in PH, a pre-clinical diagnosis in all PH patients, particularly male patients with Group 2/3 disease, may mitigate some of the previously observed advantages of estrogen on outcomes in PH.
Lavannya Pandit, MD, FCCP