Search

Conflict of interest: No Introduction and Objectives: The impact of cystic fibrosis (CF) transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) modulators on the natural history of liver disease is unknown. The objective of this study is to assess changes in the rates of liver transplantation compared to lung transplantation since the approval of the new CFTR modulators in October 2019. Patients / Materials and Methods: Patients with CF (PwCF) who were listed for liver or lung transplantation were identified in the OPTN/UNOS database. We compared outcomes between the pre- and post-CFTR modulators eras, 2012-2019 and 2020-2022, respectively. Results and Discussion: Between 2012-2023, 95,254 liver and 28,715 lung transplants were performed, including 138 (0.09%) and 2,129 (7.4%) transplants in PwCF, respectively. The rate of death on the waitlist was not significantly different between eras in either group. For liver transplantation, the median percentage of CF-related listings per year was similar between the two eras 0.13% (0.11-0.17%) in 2012-2019 vs. 0.12% (0.11-0.13%, p=0.18) in 2020-2023. Similarly, the median percentage of CF-related liver transplants per year was 0.14% (0.12-0.20%) vs. 0.14% (0.11-0.16%, p=0.450) (see figure). For lung transplantation waitlist additions per year decreased from 7.58% (6.72-8.17%) to 1.11% (0.95-1.52%) per year from the pre- to the post-modulator era (p

Liver transplantation (LT) in patients with significant portopulmonary hypertension (PoPH) is associated with an increased risk of several complications, including graft failure. Graft loss is one of the major reasons. Living donor LT (LDLT) is not routinely performed in the United States in this patient population. In addition, ethical considerations often preclude donation from healthy donors in the setting of a procedure associated with an elevated risk of recipient morbidity and mortality. However, LDLT allows LT to be performed electively, using a superior graft with an improved probability of a good outcome. The key to success in managing these patients is establishing a multidisciplinary team that follows an institutional protocol with clear evaluation and management criteria. These criteria include screening and early diagnosis as well as treatment of PoPH with the goal of optimizing pulmonary arterial hemodynamics and maintaining right ventricular function. Any protocol should include admitting the patient to the hospital a day before surgery for placement of a pulmonary artery catheter to measure and derive relevant hemodynamic variables. A multidisciplinary team should determine the fitness for a transplant a after a careful review of the most up-to-date clinical information. Finally, the team prescribes and executes a plan for optimization and safe perioperative management of the patient. In this report, we discuss our approach to the perioperative management of a patient with significant PoPH who safely underwent LDLT with an excellent postoperative outcome.

Background. The prevalence of obesity is rising in the general population. Donor obesity (body mass index ≥30 kg/m2) may potentially reduce the donor pool and impact outcomes in living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). Methods. We utilized the national transplant database to investigate the impact of donor obesity on donor and recipient outcomes. This was a retrospective cohort study of all LDLTs performed in the United States between January 2010 and June 2023. Outcomes of interest were analyzed by univariable and multivariable logistic regression. Patient and graft survival was evaluated using Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional analysis. Results. Six hundred seventy-four donors with obesity and 3498 donors without obesity were analyzed. Donors with obesity had higher rates of readmission within 1 y of donation (15.9% versus 11.6%; P = 0.003). The risk of readmission was significantly different between 6 wk and 6 mo of donation (8.8% versus 5.9%; P = 0.036). Donor body mass index (odds ratio [OR], 1.460; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.129-1.999; P = 0.004) and preoperative alkaline phosphatase levels (OR, 1.005; 95% CI, 1.000-1.011; P = 0.038) were independent predictors of donor readmission. High LDLT center volume was associated with reduced odds of donor readmission (OR, 0.509; 95% CI, 0.373-0.694; P

Background. In liver transplantation, advances in ex situ normothermic machine perfusion (NMP) have improved outcomes compared with traditional static cold storage (SCS) in donation after circulatory death (DCD) organs. We aimed to characterize trends in the utilization of NMP versus SCS in DCD liver transplantation in the United States. Methods. This retrospective cohort study used data from the United Network for Organ Sharing database to identify recipient–donor adult liver transplant pairs from DCD donors from January 2016 to June 2022. Utilization of NMP and changes in donor risk index (DRI) and components between NMP and SCS were assessed across transplant year eras (2016–2018, 2019–2020, and 2021–2022). Statistical comparisons were made using the Kruskal-Wallis test or the chi-square test. Results. A total of 3937 SCS and 127 NMP DCD donor transplants were included. Utilization of NMP ranged from ~0.4% to 3.5% from 2016 to 2021 and rose significantly to 11.2% in early 2022. Across transplant eras, median DRI increased significantly for SCS and NMP, but the magnitude of the increase was larger for NMP. With NMP DCDs, there were significant increases in median donor age, national share proportion, and “cold ischemic time” over time. Finally, there was a shift toward including higher DRI donors and higher model for end-stage liver disease score transplant recipients with NMP in later transplant eras. Conclusions. In recent years, NMP utilization has increased and expanded to donors with higher DRI and recipients with higher model for end-stage liver disease score at transplant, suggesting increasing familiarity and risk tolerance with NMP technology. As NMP remains a relatively new technique, ongoing study of patient outcomes, organ allocation practices, and utilization patterns is critical.

Abstract: Sickle-cell disease (SCD) leads to recurrent vaso-occlusive crises, chronic end-organ damage, and resultant physical, psychological, and social disabilities. Although hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation (HSCT) is potentially curative for SCD, this procedure is associated with well-recognized morbidity and mortality and thus is ideally offered only to patients at high risk of significant complications. However, it is difficult to identify patients at high risk before significant complications have occurred, and once patients experience significant organ damage, they are considered poor candidates for HSCT. In turn, patients who have experienced long-term organ toxicity from SCD such as renal or liver failure may be candidates for solid-organ transplantation (SOT); however, the transplanted organs are at risk of damage by the original disease. Thus, dual HSCT and organ transplantation could simultaneously replace the failing organ and eliminate the underlying disease process. Advances in HSCT conditioning such as reduced-intensity regimens and alternative donor selection may expand both the feasibility of and potential donor pool for transplantation. This review summarizes the current state of HSCT and organ transplantation in SCD and discusses future directions and the clinical feasibility of dual HSCT/SOT.

Background Heart retransplant (HRT) recipients represent a growing number of transplant patients. The impact of concurrent kidney transplants (KTs) in this population has not been well studied. We tested the hypothesis that recipients of HRT with concurrent KT (HRT‐KT) would have worse survival than recipients of HRT alone. Methods and Results A retrospective analysis of the United Network of Organ Sharing database was performed for all patients undergoing HRT from 1987 to 2011. There were 1660 HRT patients, of which 116 (7%) received concurrent KT. Those who received HRT‐KT had older age, longer wait‐list time, worse kidney function, and more known diabetes. Survival among recipients of HRT‐KT was significantly better than that of recipients of HRT alone (P=0.005). A subgroup of 323 HRT patients with severe kidney dysfunction (estimated glomerular filtration rate