Skip Navigation
Skip to contents

ACC : Acute and Critical Care

OPEN ACCESS
SEARCH
Search
Advanced Search
mobile menu button

Articles

Page Path
HOME > Acute Crit Care > Volume 33(3); 2018 > Article
Original Article Feasibility of Immediate in-Intensive Care Unit Pulmonary Rehabilitation after Lung Transplantation: A Single Center Experience
Joo Han Song1, Ji-Eun Park1orcid, Sang Chul Lee2orcid, Sarang Kim2, Dong Hyung Lee3, Eun Kyoung Kim4, Song Yee Kim1orcid, Ji Cheol Shin2, Jin Gu Lee5, Hyo Chae Paik5, Moo Suk Park1orcid
Acute and Critical Care 2018;33(3):146-153.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.4266/acc.2018.00129
Published online: August 31, 2018

1Division of Pulmonology, Department of Internal Medicine, Institute of Chest Diseases, Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea

2Department and Research Institute of Rehabilitation Medicine, Severance Rehabilitation Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea

3Division of Nursing, Pediatric Intensive Care Unit, Severance Hospital, Seoul, Korea

4Division of Nursing, Neurointensive Care Unit, Severance Hospital, Seoul, Korea

5Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea

Corresponding author Moo Suk Park Division of Pulmonology, Department of Internal Medicine, Institute of Chest Diseases, Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50-1 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul 03722, Korea Tel: +82-2-2228-1930 Fax: +82-2-393-6884 E-mail: pms70@yuhs.ac
• Received: April 12, 2018   • Revised: May 30, 2018   • Accepted: May 31, 2018

Copyright © 2018 The Korean Society of Critical Care Medicine

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

  • 8,694 Views
  • 146 Download
  • 4 Web of Science
  • 2 Crossref
  • 3 Scopus
prev next
Full Article

Download PDF Download PDF

  • Background
    Physical function may influence perioperative outcomes of lung transplantation. We investigated the feasibility of a pulmonary rehabilitation program initiated in the immediate postoperative period at an intensive care unit (ICU) for patients who underwent lung transplantation.
  • Methods
    We retrospectively evaluated 22 patients who received pulmonary rehabilitation initiated in the ICU within 2 weeks after lung transplantation at our institution from March 2015 to February 2016. Levels of physical function were graded at the start of pulmonary rehabilitation and then weekly throughout rehabilitation according to criteria from our institutional pulmonary rehabilitation program: grade 1, bedside (G1); grade 2, dangling (G2); grade 3, standing (G3); and grade IV, gait (G4).
  • Results
    The median age of patients was 53 years (range, 25 to 73 years). Fourteen patients (64%) were males. The initial level of physical function was G1 in nine patients, G2 in seven patients, G3 in four patients, and G4 in two patients. Patients started pulmonary rehabilitation at a median of 7.5 days (range, 1 to 29 days) after lung transplantation. We did not observe any rehabilitation-related complications during follow-up. The final level of physical function was G1 in six patients, G3 in two patients, and G4 in 14 patients. Fourteen of the 22 patients were able to walk with or without assistance, and 13 of them maintained G4 until discharge; the eight remaining patients never achieved G4.
  • Conclusions
    Our results suggest the feasibility of early pulmonary rehabilitation initiated in the ICU within a few days after lung transplantation.
  • Keywords: intensive care units; lung transplantation; rehabilitation
Lung transplantation (LTx) has become the standard of care as a lifesaving procedure for carefully selected patients suffering from end-stage lung disease refractory to other treatments [1]. However, a growing body of literature has indicated that patients who have survived LTx commonly have significant and prolonged neuromuscular complications that impair their physical function [2,3] and quality of life [4] after hospital discharge. Moreover, a modest decrease in mortality after LTx [5] and technical advancements, such as bridging strategies, have allowed older and more debilitated patients with end-stage lung disease to be considered as LTx candidates, although a more complicated clinical course can be expected for these patients [6-8].
Rehabilitation is an important component in the care of patients after LTx [9], but there are currently no standard guidelines focused on rehabilitation in LTx [10]. In addition, the efficiency of pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) with a conventional start of exercise upon weaning of sedation or mechanical ventilation outside the intensive care unit (ICU) has been well described in LTx patients [11,12], but there is a paucity of data regarding PR initiated in the ICU as early as possible for patients post-LTx. Physical function has been suggested to influence perioperative outcomes after LTx [13,14]. Immobility plays a crucial role in the development of neuromuscular weakness, which can influence the performance of activities of daily living and the return to social activities in ICU survivors [15]. This study aimed to demonstrate the feasibility of early PR initiated in the ICU for patients who had undergone LTx by analyzing the early transplantation outcomes.
Study Design and Patients
Data were retrospectively extracted from a prospectively-collected center registry of LTx patients and electronic medical records from the ICU. Consecutive patients who underwent LTx between March 2015 and February 2016 were assessed for inclusion in this study. Among these patients, those who received early PR initiated in the ICU according to our institutional eligibility criteria (Figure 1) were selected for this study. Patients were excluded if PR was initiated 2 weeks after admission to the ICU post-transplant. The usual procedures for LTx have been described previously [16]. All patients were admitted to the ICU from the operation room. This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Severance Hospital of Yonsei University College of Medicine, with a waiver of individual consent due to the retrospective study design (IRB No. 4-2013-0770).
Pulmonary Rehabilitation Program
In 2015, a structured rehabilitation program was developed at our center, with a focus on improving rehabilitation and facilitating mobility. The program was designed to be initiated within the ICU for patients with the following conditions or treatments: (1) LTx recipients; (2) prolonged mechanical ventilator use after surgery; (3) prolonged mechanical ventilator use in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; and (4) prolonged mechanical ventilator-dependent chronic respiratory failure. The PR was developed by a core rehabilitation team, consisting of a pulmonary/critical care physician, specialist nurse, and physical therapist. On admission to the ICU after LTx, all recipients received physiotherapy provided by the ICU nursing staff at least once daily from day 1 post-transplant. Physiotherapy was individually tailored but primarily included frequent chest percussion and range of motion (ROM) of the upper and lower extremities lasting 5 to 10 minutes, and a position change every 4 hours. In addition, as soon as LTx recipients were considered able to receive PR, initial assessment of the functional grade for mobilization capacity and subsequent establishment of a rehabilitation plan were conducted by a specialized physical therapist. A qualitative assessment of the use of steroids or neuromuscular agents was made for each patient.
Our PR protocol involved four levels of mobilizing therapy, consisting of 60 minutes of exercise each day, 5 days a week. The functional grade of mobilizing capacity was recorded weekly until PR was over, as illustrated in Figure 2, and the corresponding level of PR was delivered by an attending specialized therapist. In brief, subjects of grade 1 were confined to bed and received bedside physical therapy, including passive ROM, active-assistive ROM, active ROM, resistance exercise, sitting exercise leaning against the backrest, and bed cycling. Subjects who were able to sit on the edge of the bed (grade 2) received dynamic sitting balance training. The ability to stand with one’s knees supported by others (Bobath standing) or to stand with a walker at the bedside was grade 3. Advancement to the final grade was based on the ability to walk (grade 4, gait group).
Statistical Analysis
Continuous variables were analyzed with Mann-Whitney Utests and summarized as median and interquartile range. Categorical data were analyzed with Fisher exact tests or Pearson chi-square tests, depending on the distribution, and were summarized as absolute frequencies and percentages. All analyses were performed with the SPSS version 16.0 software (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA).
Patient Characteristics Prior to PR in the ICU
During the study period, 26 patients had LTx and PR after ICU admission. Of these 26 patients, 22 were eligible for the study: they had PR sessions of at least 7 days that began in the ICU within 4 weeks after transplant. Patient demographics and preoperative status are summarized in Table 1. The median age of the 22 patients was 53 years (range, 25 to 73 years), and 14 (64%) patients were males. Indications for LTx were idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (n=12), collagen vascular disease interstitial lung disease (n=1), chronic pulmonary obstructive disease (n=1), bronchiectasis (n=2), bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome after allogeneic stem cell transplantation (n=3), acute interstitial pneumonitis (n=2), and primary pulmonary hypertension (n=1). Emergency status as assessed by the Korean Lung Allocation Score [17] is summarized in Table 1. Preoperative extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) support was used in seven patients (32%). The median ischemic time was 282 minutes (range, 185 to 325 minutes), and all patients received bilateral LTx using ECMO for intraoperative cardiopulmonary support. All patients were intubated and transferred to the ICU after LTx; 12 (55%) were weaned off of ECMO in the operating room.
Physical Function Assessed by Mobilizing Capacity
Eight patients (36%) had received rehabilitation prior to LTx with a median of 26 days (range, 2 to 100 days). Of the eight patients who had preoperative PR, three had received hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. All 22 patients started PR at a median of 7.5 days (range, 1 to 29 days) after LTx (Table 2). We did not observe any rehabilitation-related complications during follow-up. Median time from weaning of intraoperative ECMO support and PR initiation was 6 days (range, 1 to 21 days). Thirteen patients (59%) were on mechanical ventilator support when PR was initiated with a median of 11.5 days (range, 2 to 43 days), while eight patients were on tracheostomy status. Neuromuscular disorder was observed in six patients. At the time of PR, the initial functional grade of mobilizing capacity according to our institutional grading system (Figure 2) was grade 1 in nine patients, grade 2 in seven patients, grade 3 in four patients, and grade 4 in two patients (Table 2). Patients received a median of 6.5 weeks (range, 1 to 36 weeks) of rehabilitation before hospital discharge or cessation for safety reasons. At the end of PR, the functional grade was grade 1 in six patients, grade 3 in two patients, and grade 4 in 14 patients. Fourteen of the 22 patients were able to walk with or without assistance, and 13 of them maintained grade 4 until discharge; the eight remaining patients never achieved grade 4. In comparison to those who failed to achieve and maintain grade 4, patients with grade 4 had significantly lower scores on the modified Medical Research Council dyspnea scale (P=0.074) and the New York Heart Association functional class (P=0.022). These patients also had a significantly shorter median duration of propofol (8 days vs. 14 days, P=0.02) and remifentanyl (16 days vs. 23 days, P=0.004) infusions during immediate postoperative management. The use of other drugs, such as high dose steroids, used within 1 month prior to PR, muscle relaxants, or midazolam, did not differ between grade 4 patients and patients of lower grades. Other pretransplant clinical characteristics also did not differ between these groups.
Clinical Outcomes of Lung Transplantation
Median duration of postoperative ECMO support was 2 days (range, 1 to 9 days); median duration of postoperative mechanical ventilation was 13 days (range, 3 to 149 days). Six patients received second ECMO support due to bleeding (n=3), pneumonia (n=2), or cardiac arrest (n=1). The median ICU stay was 13 days (range, 3 to 149 days), and the median hospital stay was 43 days (13 to 221 days). The ICU stay was shorter in grade 4 patients (6.5 days) than in patients of lower functional grades (32.5 days, P<0.001). Likewise, the hospital stay was shorter in grade 4 patients (50.0 days) than in patients of lower functional grades (102.5 days, P=0.035). Within 6 months from LTx, there were 10 cases of mortality, and after a median follow-up of 13.4 months (range, 7.0 to 16.0 months) after LTx, 13 patients (59%) had died (Table 2). Infection (77%) was the most common cause of death in our cohort.
After LTx, the recipient’s physical capacity can be affected by prolonged hospitalization with an ICU stay, postoperative complications, and use of immunosuppressants [18]. Consequently, many patients receiving LTx suffer from substantial muscle dysfunction, reduced physical capacity, and a decline in health-related quality of life [19,20]. In an attempt to improve the mobilizing capacity of LTx recipients as early as possible, we assessed LTx recipients using our institutional selection criteria for an in-ICU rehabilitation program within 48 hours to 72 hours postoperatively. The findings of this small case series suggest that in-ICU PR as early as possible postoperatively is feasible and safe for patients who undergo LTx, as no relevant complications related to PR were observed.
Several previous trials have suggested that rehabilitation should begin as early as possible postoperatively and should prioritize upright positioning and gait exercises in critically ill patients with acute respiratory failure, often with prolonged mechanical ventilation support, or in patients during the postoperative period [21,22]. Patients with in-ICU achievement of grade 4 mobility (gait) spent less time in the ICU and in the hospital and had improved survival. However, these findings should be interpreted with caution because measures that employ standard clinical tests, such as the ICU mobility scale or functional status score for the ICU, were not available for this study. Neuromuscular weakness is common in critically ill patients and is highly correlated with increased duration of mechanical ventilation, increased length of stay in the ICU, and increased in-hospital mortality for critically ill patients [23-25]. Therefore, it is possible that the patients with less complicated pre- and post-transplant clinical courses and, consequently, less neuromuscular weakness, also had better walking ability. The most common cause for mortality in our study was infection. Objective measurements of early mobilizing ability to evaluate its effect on post-transplant infectious complications would be useful to demonstrate the efficacy of early PR after LTx and to improve post-transplantation survival outcomes.
Use of immunosuppressants and a prolonged hospital course in LTx patients can contribute to delayed recovery of quadriceps strength [26]. Moreover, as shown in our study results, prolonged use of sedatives can be associated with weakness and low physical capacity although there remains substantial controversy regarding this association [23].
Previous reports of rehabilitation for LTx recipients demonstrated the efficacy of postoperative rehabilitation using an outpatient program that began after the recipients were discharged from the hospital. A randomized controlled trial by Fuller et al. [27] demonstrated that rehabilitation programs of either 7 weeks or 14 weeks were both beneficial in terms of functional exercise capacity, lower limb strength, and quality of life at 6 months after LTx. Because our patients received PR initiated in the ICU before they were healthy enough for discharge, interruption of the rehabilitation program was somewhat frequently observed, depending on how complicated the post-transplant course and deconditioning was, although the interruption was not significantly associated with achievement of gait (data not shown). In fact, no prior studies have focused on the rehabilitation of patients before discharge in the early postoperative period [10,28]. As the demographics of transplant candidates has shifted from young and fit patients to elderly adults with comorbidities and frailty, development of an early rehabilitation program suitable for these patients should be further explored.
This pilot study had some limitations. First, our sample size was small, and the data are from a single center. Second, the retrospective nature of the study meant we could not draw conclusions about the causal effect of early PR within the ICU on transplantation outcomes. Finally, the level of physical activity could not be assessed by measurements that had been validated in ICU patients specifically [10]. Physical activity is usually measured by time spent walking (6-minute walking test) or doing activities of daily living. However, these measurements are not appropriate for assessing the level of physical activity of critically ill patients receiving treatment in the ICU. Further evaluation of the utility of our in-ICU rehabilitation program for immediate postoperative LTx patients should include measurement tools of physical function to demonstrate the causal effect on transplantation outcomes.
In conclusion, our results suggest the feasibility of early PR initiated in the ICU within a few days after LTx. Although future prospective studies will be needed to verify the effectiveness of our early in-ICU PR program and the superior posttransplant outcomes of patients who could walk, our results underline the potential importance of early PR specific to LTx patients.
▪ Rehabilitation is an important component in the care of patients after lung transplantation (LTx).
▪ This study aimed to demonstrate the feasibility of early pulmonary rehabilitation initiated in the intensive care unit for patients who had undergone LTx by analyzing the early transplantation outcomes.

No potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.

Figure 1.
Assessment of eligibility for pulmonary rehabilitation. ICU: intensive care unit; RASS: Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale; FiO2: fraction of inspired oxygen; PEEP: positive end-expiratory pressure; SpO2: peripheral oxygen saturation; MAP: mean arterial pressure; DVT: deep vein thrombosis; INR: international normalized ratio.
acc-2018-00129f1.jpg
Figure 2.
Pulmonary rehabilitation program based on the functional grade. ROM: range of motion; tid: ter in die, three times a day; PTx: physical therapy.
acc-2018-00129f2.jpg
Table 1.
Pretransplant baseline characteristics
Characteristics Value
Age (yr) 52.6±12.4 (25-73)
Male sex 14 (64)
Body mass index (kg/m2) 19.9 (16.25-23.4)
Smoker 13 (59)
Underlying lung disease
 IPF 12 (54)
 COPD 1 (5)
 PPAH 1 (5)
 AIP 2 (9)
 Bronchiectasis 2 (9)
 Post-SCT BOS 3 (13)
 CVD-ILD 1 (5)
mMRC grade
 II or III/IV 9 (41)/13 (59)
NYHA grade
 II or III/IV 7 (32)/15 (68)
Comorbidity 10 (45)
Osteopenia/osteoporosis 7 (32)/5 (23)
25-Hydroxy vitamin D (ng/ml) 9.0 (6.1-19.0)
Pulmonary function
 FVC (l) 1.5 (1.1-2.4)
 FEV1 (l) 1.1 (0.8-1.9)
 FEV1 (% predicted) 43 (30-62)
Cardiac function
 LVEF (%) 64 (58-68)
Emergency statusa
 Status 0 10 (45.5)
 Status 1 11 (50)
 Status 2 1 (4.5)
Time on waiting list (day) 35 (10-168)
Donor age (yr) 42.2±12.9 (16-59)
Donor sex, male 15 (68)
Donor body mass index (kg/m2) 22.8 (15.8-32)
Donor PaO2/FiO2 428 (195-669)
Preoperative status
 Tracheostomy 6 (27)
 Hospitalization 3 (14)
 ICU care 11 (50)
 Mechanical ventilator 11 (50)
 ECMO support 7 (32)

Values are presented as mean±standard deviation (range), number (%), or median (interquartile range).

IPF: idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis; COPD: chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; PPAH: primary pulmonary hypertension; AIP: acute interstitial pneumonia; SCT: stem cell transplantation; BOS: bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome; CVD-ILD: collagen vascular disease related interstitial lung disease; mMRC: modified Medical Research Council; NYHA: New York Heart Association; FVC: forced vital capacity; FEV1: forced expiratory volume in 1 second; LVEF: left ventricular ejection fraction; PaO2: arterial partial pressure of oxygen; FiO2: fraction of inspired oxygen; ICU: intensive care unit; ECMO: extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

a Lungs are allocated by the emergency status of the recipient (Korean lung allocation score).

Table 2.
Change of functional grade of mobilizing capacity and survival outcomes
Patient no. Age (yr) Sex Diagnosis Start of PR Days of PR Initial functional grade Best functional grade Final functional grade O2 support at start of PR O2 support at finish of PR Status, survival months Outcome (cause of death)
1 54 F CVD-ILD POD 14 10 4-2 4-3 4-3 Nasal Nasal Alive, 14.8 -
2 63 M IPF POD 7 48 2-1 4-2 4-2 HFNC Nasal Alive, 16.0 -
3 46 F Bronchiectasis POD 11 27 3-2 4-3 4-3 Ventilator Room air Alive, 15.7 -
4a 52 M IPF POD 7 13 2-1 1-1 1-1 T-mask Ventilator Died, 1.4 Sudden cardiac arrest
5 49 F AIP POD 1 59 1-1 1-1 1-1 Ventilator Ventilator Died, 2.9 Bleeding
6 32 F Post-SCT BOS POD 8 217 3-1 4-2 4-2 Ventilator Room air Alive, 14.6 -
7 62 F Bronchiectasis POD 6 103 1-2 1-1 1-1 Ventilator Ventilator Died, 4.0 Pneumonia (Pseudomonas aeruginosa)
8 26 M Post-SCT BOS POD 6 85 1-2 3-2 3-2 Nasal Room air Died, 12.7 Sepsis (Acinetobacter baumannii)
9 58 F IPF POD 12 5 3-3 4-2 4-2 Ventilator Nasal Died, 5.4 Thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura
10 73 M IPF POD 7 26 2-1 4-3 4-3 Nasal Room air Died, 10.3 Pneumonia (A. baumannii)
11 58 M IPF POD 1 14 1-1 4-2 4-2 Nasal Nasal Died, 6.5 Pneumonia (pathogen unknown)
12 64 M IPF POD 6 42 1-2 4-3 4-3 Nasal Room air Alive, 13.4 -
13 60 M IPF POD 6 59 1-2 3-1 3-1 Ventilator Ventilator Died, 4.9 Sepsis (A. baumannii)
14 61 M COPD POD 7 10 2-1 4-1 4-1 Nasal Nasal Died, 5.6 Pneumonia (A. baumannii)
15 61 M IPF POD 7 5 2-1 1-1 1-1 Ventilator Ventilator Died, 1.5 Sepsis (pathogen unknown)
16 46 M AIP POD 6 8 1-2 1-1 1-1 Ventilator Ventilator Died, 2.6 Sepsis (pathogen unknown)
17 55 F IPF POD 13 7 4-1 4-3 4-3 Nasal Nasal Alive, 10.6 -
18 53 M IPF POD 1 27 1-1 4-3 4-3 Ventilator Room air Alive, 10.1 -
19 41 M Post-SCT BOS POD 7 75 2-1 4-3 4-2 Ventilator Nasal Alive, 9.4 -
20 25 F PPHN POD 6 43 1-2 1-2 1-2 Ventilator Ventilator Died, 2.3 Sepsis (A. baumannii)
21 60 M IPF POD 7 42 2-1 4-3 4-3 Nasal Room air Died, 5.5 Sepsis
22 58 M IPF POD 8 10 3-1 4-3 4-3 Nasal Nasal Alive, 7.0 -

PR: pulmonary rehabilitation; CVD-ILD: collagen vascular disease related interstitial lung disease; POD: postoperative day; IPF: idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis; HFNC: high flow nasal cannula; AIP: acute interstitial pneumonia; SCT: stem cell transplantation; BOS: bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome; COPD: chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; PPHN: primary pulmonary hypertension.

a Patient#4 had received liver transplantation simultaneously.

  • 1. Myles PS, Snell GI, Westall GP. Lung transplantation. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol 2007;20:21-6.ArticlePubMed
  • 2. Lands LC, Smountas AA, Mesiano G, Brosseau L, Shennib H, Charbonneau M, et al. Maximal exercise capacity and peripheral skeletal muscle function following lung transplantation. J Heart Lung Transplant 1999;18:113-20.ArticlePubMed
  • 3. Reinsma GD, ten Hacken NH, Grevink RG, van der Bij W, Koëter GH, van Weert E. Limiting factors of exercise performance 1 year after lung transplantation. J Heart Lung Transplant 2006;25:1310-6.ArticlePubMed
  • 4. Finlen Copeland CA, Vock DM, Pieper K, Mark DB, Palmer SM. Impact of lung transplantation on recipient quality of life: a serial, prospective, multicenter analysis through the first posttransplant year. Chest 2013;143:744-50.ArticlePubMed
  • 5. Yusen RD, Christie JD, Edwards LB, Kucheryavaya AY, Benden C, Dipchand AI, et al. The Registry of the International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation: thirtieth adult lung and heart-lung transplant report--2013; focus theme: age. J Heart Lung Transplant 2013;32:965-78.ArticlePubMed
  • 6. Strueber M. Bridges to lung transplantation. Curr Opin Organ Transplant 2011;16:458-61.ArticlePubMed
  • 7. Javidfar J, Brodie D, Iribarne A, Jurado J, Lavelle M, Brenner K, et al. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation as a bridge to lung transplantation and recovery. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2012;144:716-21.ArticlePubMed
  • 8. Tomaszek SC, Fibla JJ, Dierkhising RA, Scott JP, Shen KR, Wigle DA, et al. Outcome of lung transplantation in elderly recipients. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2011;39:726-31.ArticlePubMedPDF
  • 9. Nici L, Donner C, Wouters E, Zuwallack R, Ambrosino N, Bourbeau J, et al. American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society statement on pulmonary rehabilitation. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2006;173:1390-413.ArticlePubMed
  • 10. Wickerson L, Rozenberg D, Janaudis-Ferreira T, Deliva R, Lo V, Beauchamp G, et al. Physical rehabilitation for lung transplant candidates and recipients: an evidence-informed clinical approach. World J Transplant 2016;6:517-31.ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 11. Maury G, Langer D, Verleden G, Dupont L, Gosselink R, Decramer M, et al. Skeletal muscle force and functional exercise tolerance before and after lung transplantation: a cohort study. Am J Transplant 2008;8:1275-81.ArticlePubMed
  • 12. Munro PE, Holland AE, Bailey M, Button BM, Snell GI. Pulmonary rehabilitation following lung transplantation. Transplant Proc 2009;41:292-5.ArticlePubMed
  • 13. Adler J, Malone D. Early mobilization in the intensive care unit: a systematic review. Cardiopulm Phys Ther J 2012;23:5-13.Article
  • 14. Kayambu G, Boots R, Paratz J. Physical therapy for the critically ill in the ICU: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Crit Care Med 2013;41:1543-54.ArticlePubMed
  • 15. Dowdy DW, Eid MP, Dennison CR, Mendez-Tellez PA, Herridge MS, Guallar E, et al. Quality of life after acute respiratory distress syndrome: a meta-analysis. Intensive Care Med 2006;32:1115-24.ArticlePubMed
  • 16. Yu WS, Paik HC, Haam SJ, Lee CY, Nam KS, Jung HS, et al. Transition to routine use of venoarterial extracorporeal oxygenation during lung transplantation could improve early outcomes. J Thorac Dis 2016;8:1712-20.ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 17. Jeong YH, Choi S, Park SI, Kim DK, Asan Medical Center Lung Transplantation Team. Clinical outcomes of lung transplantation: experience at Asan Medical Center. Korean J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2018;51:22-8.ArticlePubMedPMCPDF
  • 18. Dierich M, Tecklenburg A, Fuehner T, Tegtbur U, Welte T, Haverich A, et al. The influence of clinical course after lung transplantation on rehabilitation success. Transpl Int 2013;26:322-30.ArticlePubMed
  • 19. Walsh JR, Chambers DC, Davis RJ, Morris NR, Seale HE, Yerkovich ST, et al. Impaired exercise capacity after lung transplantation is related to delayed recovery of muscle strength. Clin Transplant 2013;27:E504-11.ArticlePubMed
  • 20. Walsh JR, Chambers DC, Yerkovich ST, Hopkins PM, Morris NR. Low levels of physical activity predict worse survival to lung transplantation and poor early post-operative outcomes. J Heart Lung Transplant 2016;35:1041-3.ArticlePubMed
  • 21. Calvo-Ayala E, Khan BA, Farber MO, Ely EW, Boustani MA. Interventions to improve the physical function of ICU survivors: a systematic review. Chest 2013;144:1469-80.ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 22. Castro-Avila AC, Serón P, Fan E, Gaete M, Mickan S. Effect of early rehabilitation during intensive care unit stay on functional status: systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One 2015;10:e0130722.ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 23. Lee CM, Fan E. ICU-acquired weakness: what is preventing its rehabilitation in critically ill patients? BMC Med 2012;10:115. ArticlePubMedPMCPDF
  • 24. Nordon-Craft A, Moss M, Quan D, Schenkman M. Intensive care unit-acquired weakness: implications for physical therapist management. Phys Ther 2012;92:1494-506.ArticlePubMedPMCPDF
  • 25. Wieske L, Dettling-Ihnenfeldt DS, Verhamme C, Nollet F, van Schaik IN, Schultz MJ, et al. Impact of ICU-acquired weakness on post-ICU physical functioning: a follow-up study. Crit Care 2015;19:196. ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 26. Rozenberg D, Wickerson L, Singer LG, Mathur S. Sarcopenia in lung transplantation: a systematic review. J Heart Lung Transplant 2014;33:1203-12.ArticlePubMed
  • 27. Fuller LM, Button B, Tarrant B, Steward R, Bennett L, Snell G, et al. Longer versus shorter duration of supervised rehabilitation after lung transplantation: a randomized trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2017;98:220. -6. e3.ArticlePubMed
  • 28. Langer D. Rehabilitation in patients before and after lung transplantation. Respiration 2015;89:353-62.ArticlePubMed

Figure & Data

References

    Citations

    Citations to this article as recorded by  
    • Post-operative, inpatient rehabilitation after lung transplant evaluation (PIRATE): A feasibility randomized controlled trial
      Benjamin J Tarrant, Elizabeth Quinn, Rebecca Robinson, Megan Poulsen, Louise Fuller, Greg Snell, Bruce R Thompson, Brenda M Button, Anne E Holland
      Physiotherapy Theory and Practice.2023; 39(7): 1406.     CrossRef
    • Early Gait Function After Lung Transplantation in Patients With and Without Pretransplant Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Support
      Junghwa Do, Hyojin Lim, Kyung Cheon Seo, Suyoung Park, HyeRin Joo, Junghoon Lee, Eunjae Ko, Jaehwal Lim, Ho Cheol Kim, Dongkyu Oh, Sang-Bum Hong, Won Kim
      Transplantation Proceedings.2023; 55(3): 616.     CrossRef

    • PubReader PubReader
    • ePub LinkePub Link
    • Cite
      CITE
      export Copy
      Close
      Download Citation
      Download a citation file in RIS format that can be imported by all major citation management software, including EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and Reference Manager.
      Format:
      • RIS — For EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and most other reference management software
      • BibTeX — For JabRef, BibDesk, and other BibTeX-specific software
      Include:
      • Citation for the content below
      Feasibility of Immediate in-Intensive Care Unit Pulmonary Rehabilitation after Lung Transplantation: A Single Center Experience
      Acute Crit Care. 2018;33(3):146-153.   Published online August 31, 2018
      DOI: https://doi.org/10.4266/acc.2018.00129
      Close
    • XML DownloadXML Download
    Figure
    • 0
    • 1
    Related articles
    Feasibility of Immediate in-Intensive Care Unit Pulmonary Rehabilitation after Lung Transplantation: A Single Center Experience
    Image Image
    Figure 1. Assessment of eligibility for pulmonary rehabilitation. ICU: intensive care unit; RASS: Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale; FiO2: fraction of inspired oxygen; PEEP: positive end-expiratory pressure; SpO2: peripheral oxygen saturation; MAP: mean arterial pressure; DVT: deep vein thrombosis; INR: international normalized ratio.
    Figure 2. Pulmonary rehabilitation program based on the functional grade. ROM: range of motion; tid: ter in die, three times a day; PTx: physical therapy.

    Figure 1.

    Figure 2.

    Feasibility of Immediate in-Intensive Care Unit Pulmonary Rehabilitation after Lung Transplantation: A Single Center Experience
    Characteristics Value
    Age (yr) 52.6±12.4 (25-73)
    Male sex 14 (64)
    Body mass index (kg/m2) 19.9 (16.25-23.4)
    Smoker 13 (59)
    Underlying lung disease
     IPF 12 (54)
     COPD 1 (5)
     PPAH 1 (5)
     AIP 2 (9)
     Bronchiectasis 2 (9)
     Post-SCT BOS 3 (13)
     CVD-ILD 1 (5)
    mMRC grade
     II or III/IV 9 (41)/13 (59)
    NYHA grade
     II or III/IV 7 (32)/15 (68)
    Comorbidity 10 (45)
    Osteopenia/osteoporosis 7 (32)/5 (23)
    25-Hydroxy vitamin D (ng/ml) 9.0 (6.1-19.0)
    Pulmonary function
     FVC (l) 1.5 (1.1-2.4)
     FEV1 (l) 1.1 (0.8-1.9)
     FEV1 (% predicted) 43 (30-62)
    Cardiac function
     LVEF (%) 64 (58-68)
    Emergency statusa
     Status 0 10 (45.5)
     Status 1 11 (50)
     Status 2 1 (4.5)
    Time on waiting list (day) 35 (10-168)
    Donor age (yr) 42.2±12.9 (16-59)
    Donor sex, male 15 (68)
    Donor body mass index (kg/m2) 22.8 (15.8-32)
    Donor PaO2/FiO2 428 (195-669)
    Preoperative status
     Tracheostomy 6 (27)
     Hospitalization 3 (14)
     ICU care 11 (50)
     Mechanical ventilator 11 (50)
     ECMO support 7 (32)
    Patient no. Age (yr) Sex Diagnosis Start of PR Days of PR Initial functional grade Best functional grade Final functional grade O2 support at start of PR O2 support at finish of PR Status, survival months Outcome (cause of death)
    1 54 F CVD-ILD POD 14 10 4-2 4-3 4-3 Nasal Nasal Alive, 14.8 -
    2 63 M IPF POD 7 48 2-1 4-2 4-2 HFNC Nasal Alive, 16.0 -
    3 46 F Bronchiectasis POD 11 27 3-2 4-3 4-3 Ventilator Room air Alive, 15.7 -
    4a 52 M IPF POD 7 13 2-1 1-1 1-1 T-mask Ventilator Died, 1.4 Sudden cardiac arrest
    5 49 F AIP POD 1 59 1-1 1-1 1-1 Ventilator Ventilator Died, 2.9 Bleeding
    6 32 F Post-SCT BOS POD 8 217 3-1 4-2 4-2 Ventilator Room air Alive, 14.6 -
    7 62 F Bronchiectasis POD 6 103 1-2 1-1 1-1 Ventilator Ventilator Died, 4.0 Pneumonia (Pseudomonas aeruginosa)
    8 26 M Post-SCT BOS POD 6 85 1-2 3-2 3-2 Nasal Room air Died, 12.7 Sepsis (Acinetobacter baumannii)
    9 58 F IPF POD 12 5 3-3 4-2 4-2 Ventilator Nasal Died, 5.4 Thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura
    10 73 M IPF POD 7 26 2-1 4-3 4-3 Nasal Room air Died, 10.3 Pneumonia (A. baumannii)
    11 58 M IPF POD 1 14 1-1 4-2 4-2 Nasal Nasal Died, 6.5 Pneumonia (pathogen unknown)
    12 64 M IPF POD 6 42 1-2 4-3 4-3 Nasal Room air Alive, 13.4 -
    13 60 M IPF POD 6 59 1-2 3-1 3-1 Ventilator Ventilator Died, 4.9 Sepsis (A. baumannii)
    14 61 M COPD POD 7 10 2-1 4-1 4-1 Nasal Nasal Died, 5.6 Pneumonia (A. baumannii)
    15 61 M IPF POD 7 5 2-1 1-1 1-1 Ventilator Ventilator Died, 1.5 Sepsis (pathogen unknown)
    16 46 M AIP POD 6 8 1-2 1-1 1-1 Ventilator Ventilator Died, 2.6 Sepsis (pathogen unknown)
    17 55 F IPF POD 13 7 4-1 4-3 4-3 Nasal Nasal Alive, 10.6 -
    18 53 M IPF POD 1 27 1-1 4-3 4-3 Ventilator Room air Alive, 10.1 -
    19 41 M Post-SCT BOS POD 7 75 2-1 4-3 4-2 Ventilator Nasal Alive, 9.4 -
    20 25 F PPHN POD 6 43 1-2 1-2 1-2 Ventilator Ventilator Died, 2.3 Sepsis (A. baumannii)
    21 60 M IPF POD 7 42 2-1 4-3 4-3 Nasal Room air Died, 5.5 Sepsis
    22 58 M IPF POD 8 10 3-1 4-3 4-3 Nasal Nasal Alive, 7.0 -
    Table 1. Pretransplant baseline characteristics

    Values are presented as mean±standard deviation (range), number (%), or median (interquartile range).

    IPF: idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis; COPD: chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; PPAH: primary pulmonary hypertension; AIP: acute interstitial pneumonia; SCT: stem cell transplantation; BOS: bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome; CVD-ILD: collagen vascular disease related interstitial lung disease; mMRC: modified Medical Research Council; NYHA: New York Heart Association; FVC: forced vital capacity; FEV1: forced expiratory volume in 1 second; LVEF: left ventricular ejection fraction; PaO2: arterial partial pressure of oxygen; FiO2: fraction of inspired oxygen; ICU: intensive care unit; ECMO: extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

    Lungs are allocated by the emergency status of the recipient (Korean lung allocation score).

    Table 2. Change of functional grade of mobilizing capacity and survival outcomes

    PR: pulmonary rehabilitation; CVD-ILD: collagen vascular disease related interstitial lung disease; POD: postoperative day; IPF: idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis; HFNC: high flow nasal cannula; AIP: acute interstitial pneumonia; SCT: stem cell transplantation; BOS: bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome; COPD: chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; PPHN: primary pulmonary hypertension.

    Patient#4 had received liver transplantation simultaneously.

    Table 1.

    Table 2.

    ACC : Acute and Critical Care
    © The Korean Society of Critical Care Medicine.
    TOP