Chest, Vol 90, 29-33, Copyright © 1986 by American College of Chest Physicians

ARTICLES

Cardiac transplant patient at one year. Cyclosporine vs conventional immunosuppression

RW Emery, R Cork, R Christensen, MM Levinson, TB Icenogle, J Riley, RA Ott and JG Copeland

From March 1, 1979 thru September 30, 1984 we performed 56 cardiac transplants (Tx). The first 32 patients received conventional immunosuppression therapy consisting of azathioprine/prednisone (I/P), while the subsequent 24 patients received cyclosporine/prednisone (C/P). Twenty-one of 32 I/P patients ages 39 +/- 3 years (SEM), and 16 of 24 eligible C/P patients ages 36 +/- 3 years, survived one year with follow-up through September 30, 1985. The one year post-transplant course of these 37 patients was evaluated by chart review. While donor ages are similar, ischemic time was shorter in the conventionally treated patients. The initial hospital stay for I/P vs C/P was 67 +/- 6 vs 33 +/- 3 days (p less than .05), at a total cost of $49,900 +/- $5,800 vs $53,800 +/- $10,000. During the first year following transplantation, the I/P patients required an additional 34 +/- 7 days of hospitalization, while C/P patients required 16 +/- 10 days. Over the first year, the number of infections and rejections differed at 2.8 +/- 0.6 per I/P patient vs 1.2 +/- 0.3 per C/P patient, and 2.5 +/- 0.4 per patient vs 1.5 +/- 0.3 per patient respectively (p less than .05). Renal function test results were better in the I/P group. Results of cardiac catheterization performed at one year were similar except for cardiac index and stroke volume index, both being higher in the C/P group. Coronary anatomy was considered normal in all. These data indicate that while overall survival is similar, a shortened post- transplant hospital course with fewer necessary hospitalizations, rejection episodes and infection episodes characterizes the first year in survivors receiving C/P immunosuppression. While both groups had multiple hemo-dynamic abnormalities as compared to normal subjects, cardiac index and stroke volume index were improved in the C/P group. Therapy with C/P represents an advance in immunosuppression for cardiac transplantation as compared to I/P; however, decreased renal function and diastolic hypertension were problems in the C/P group.