Red blood cell distribution width (RDW) has been shown to have prognostic value in a number of different clinical settings, such as cardiovascular disease, including heart failure. However, its prognostic value in heart transplant (HT) recipients remains unknown. The aim of this systematic review is to determine the prognostic value of pre-transplant RDW for mortality in HT recipients. There is a pre-published protocol of this review. The terms "Heart transplant", "Red cell distribution width" and their synonyms were used in the search strategy. PubMed/Medline, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science and LILACS were searched until May 17th, 2022, without date or language restrictions. Two authors independently carried out the selection, first by title and abstract, second by full-text revision. Discrepancies were discussed and resolved with three other authors. Quality of individual studies was assessed with Newcastle Ottawa Scale (NOS) for cohorts. After removing the duplicates, 3885 articles were identified. Four articles were included in the qualitative synthesis. Three studies were classified as "good quality": whereas one as "poor quality" according to NOS scale. All the included articles evaluated long-term mortality and one study also evaluated short-term mortality. In this one, a correlation between higher RDW values and short-term mortality was reported. Meanwhile, in all the studies, a high pre-HT RDW was a marker of long-term mortality following cardiac transplantation. Our review shows that an elevated on-admission RDW is associated with long-term mortality in heart transplantation recipients.

Pulmonary hypertension (PH) is a common complication of interstitial lung disease (ILD) and is associated with worse outcomes and increased mortality. Evaluation of PH is recommended in lung transplant candidates, but there are currently no standardized screening approaches. Trials have identified therapies that are effective in this setting, providing another rationale to routinely screen patients with ILD for PH.

What screening strategies for identifying PH in patients with ILD are supported by expert consensus?

The study convened a panel of 16 pulmonologists with expertise in PH and ILD, and used a modified Delphi consensus process with three surveys to identify PH screening strategies. Survey 1 consisted primarily of open-ended questions. Surveys 2 and 3 were developed from responses to survey 1 and contained statements about PH screening that panelists rated from -5 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).

Panelists reached consensus on several triggers for suspicion of PH including the following: symptoms, clinical signs, findings on chest CT scan or other imaging, abnormalities in pulse oximetry, elevations in brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) or N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), and unexplained worsening in pulmonary function tests or 6-min walk distance. Echocardiography and BNP/NT-proBNP were identified as screening tools for PH. Right heart catheterization was deemed essential for confirming PH.

Many patients with ILD may benefit from early evaluation of PH now that an approved therapy is available. Protocols to evaluate patients with ILD often overlap with evaluations for pulmonary hypertension-interstitial lung disease and can be used to assess the risk of PH. Because standardized approaches are lacking, this consensus statement is intended to aid physicians in the identification of patients with ILD and possible PH, and provide guidance for timely right heart catheterization.

A 68-year-old man presented to our ED with shortness of breath, weakness, and a 25-lb unintentional weight loss. He had undergone bilateral lung transplantation (cytomegalovirus [CMV]: donor+, recipient+; Epstein-Barr virus: donor+; recipient+) for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) 18 months prior. His posttransplant course was fairly unremarkable until 1 month earlier, when he was admitted for breathlessness and weakness. CT of the chest during that admission revealed mild intralobular and interlobular septal thickening. A bronchoscopy with BAL and transbronchial biopsies did not show acute cellular rejection, but the BAL fluid was positive for coronavirus. His cortisol level was undetectable; he was diagnosed with adrenal insufficiency and fludrocortisone was initiated. He was taking prednisone, tacrolimus, and everolimus for immunosuppression and valganciclovir, itraconazole, and trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole for antimicrobial prophylaxis. His 25-lb weight loss occurred over the span of just one month.

Acute rejection remains a major source of morbidity after lung transplantation. Given the importance of this diagnosis, an international grading system was developed to standardize the diagnosis of acute lung-allograft rejection. The reliability of this grading system has not been adequately assessed by previous studies.

We examined the level of agreement in grading transbronchial biopsy specimens obtained from a large multicenter study (AIRSAC [Comparison of a Tacrolimus/Sirolimus/Prednisone Regimen vs Tacrolimus/Azathioprine/Prednisone Immunosuppressive Regimen in Lung Transplantation] trial). Biopsy specimens were initially graded for acute rejection and lymphocytic bronchiolitis by the site pathologist and subsequently graded by a central pathologist. Reliability of interobserver grading was evaluated using Cohen κ coefficients.

A total of 481 transbronchial biopsy specimens were graded by both the site and central pathologists. The overall concordance rates were 74% and 89% for grade A and grade B biopsy specimens, respectively. When samples from biopsies performed at different time points after transplantation were assessed, there was a higher level of agreement early (≤ 6 weeks) after transplant compared with later time points for acute rejection. However, there was still only moderate agreement for both grade A (κ score 0.479; 95% CI, 0.29-0.67) and grade B (κ score 0.465; 95% CI, 0.08-0.85) rejection.

These results expand upon previous reports of interobserver variability in grading transbronchial biopsy specimens after lung transplantation. Given the variability in grading these specimens, we advocate further education of the histopathologic findings in lung transplant biopsy specimens, as well as revisiting the current criteria for grading transbronchial biopsy specimens to improve concordance among lung transplant pathologists.

ClinicalTrials.gov; No. NCT00321906; URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov.

Quality of life (QOL) is an important but understudied outcome after lung transplantation. Previous cross-sectional, single-center studies suggest improved QOL, but few prior longitudinal multicenter data exist regarding the effect of transplantation on the patient’s QOL.

We hypothesized that lung transplantation confers a 1-year QOL benefit in both physical and psychologic well-being; we further hypothesized that the magnitude of benefit would vary by sex, native disease, age, or type of transplant operation. To test these hypotheses, we conducted a secondary analysis using QOL data prospectively and serially measured with the Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey, version 2 (SF-36) in a multicenter cytomegalovirus prevention clinical trial. Linear mixed-effects models were used to assess the impact of transplantation on the recipient’s QOL.

Over the first year after lung transplantation, the SF-36 Physical Component Score significantly increased an average of 10.9 points from baseline levels (P < .0001). A positive benefit was observed for all native diseases; however, the magnitude varied slightly by native disease (P = .04) but not by sex (P = .35), age (P = .06), or transplant type (P = .30). In contrast, the SF-36 Mental Component Score did not change from baseline (P = .36) and remained well below population norms.

Our results demonstrate that lung transplantation confers clinically important QOL benefits in physical domains but not in psychologic well-being. A better understanding of the barriers to psychologic well-being after transplant is critical to enhancing the benefits of lung transplantation.

Immunosuppressive pharmacologic agents prescribed to patients with diffuse interstitial and inflammatory lung disease and lung transplant recipients are associated with potential risks for adverse reactions. Strategies for minimizing such risks include administering these drugs according to established, safe protocols; monitoring to detect manifestations of toxicity; and patient education. Hence, an evidence-based guideline for physicians can improve safety and optimize the likelihood of a successful outcome. To maximize the likelihood that these agents will be used safely, the American College of Chest Physicians established a committee to examine the clinical evidence for the administration and monitoring of immunosuppressive drugs (with the exception of corticosteroids) to identify associated toxicities associated with each drug and appropriate protocols for monitoring these agents.

Committee members developed and refined a series of questions about toxicities of immunosuppressives and current approaches to administration and monitoring. A systematic review was carried out by the American College of Chest Physicians. Committee members were supplied with this information and created this evidence-based guideline.

It is hoped that these guidelines will improve patient safety when immunosuppressive drugs are given to lung transplant recipients and to patients with diffuse interstitial lung disease.