Early experience of a new national lung allocation scheme in the UK based on clinical urgency

Abstract

IntroductionA new UK Lung Allocation Scheme (UKLAS) was introduced in 2017, replacing the previous geographic allocation system. Patients are prioritised according to predefined clinical criteria into a three-tier system: the super-urgent lung allocation scheme (SULAS), the urgent lung allocation scheme (ULAS) and the non-urgent lung allocation scheme (NULAS). This study assessed the early impact of this scheme on waiting-list and post-transplant outcomes.MethodsA cohort study of adult lung transplant registrations between March 2015 and November 2016 (era-1) and between May 2017 and January 2019 (era-2). Outcomes from registration were compared between eras and stratified by urgency tier and diagnostic group.ResultsDuring era-1, 461 patients were registered. In era-2, 471 patients were registered (19 (4.0%) SULAS, 82 (17.4%) ULAS and 370 (78.6%) NULAS). SULAS patients were younger (median age 35 vs 50 and 55 for urgent and non-urgent, respectively, p=0.0015) and predominantly suffered from cystic fibrosis (53%) or pulmonary fibrosis (37%). Between eras 1 and 2, the odds of transplantation within 6 months of registration were increased (OR=1.41, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.85, p=0.0142) despite only a 5% increase in transplant activity. Median time-to-transplantation during era-1 was 427 days compared with waiting times in era-2 of 8 days for SULAS, 15 days for ULAS and 585 days for NULAS patients. Waiting-list mortality (15% era-1 vs 13% era-2; p=0.5441) and post-transplant survival at 1 year (81.3% era-1 vs 83.3% era-2; p=0.6065) were similar between eras.ConclusionThe UKLAS scheme prioritises the critically ill and improves transplantation odds. The true impact on waiting-list mortality and post-transplant survival requires further follow-up.