Search

Living donor liver transplantation has expanded in recent years, particularly in North America. As experience with this procedure has matured over the last 25 years, centers are increasingly faced with potential living donors who are more medically complex. As donors move through the evaluation process, completing the informed consent process continues to be challenged by a paucity of granular data demonstrating long-term outcomes and overall safety specifically in the otherwise "healthy" living liver donor population. Two recently published studies examined long-term outcomes post-living liver donation using Korean registry data and reported similar results, with excellent overall survival when compared to appropriately matched controls. However, the authors of these studies were presented differently, with one reporting an alarmist view based on one aspect of a suboptimal analysis approach using an inappropriate comparator group. Herein, the North American Living Liver Donor Innovation Group (NALLDIG) consortium discusses these two studies and their potential impact on living liver donation in North America, ultimately highlighting the importance of scientific integrity in data presentation and dissemination when using transplant registry data.

Background: A report from a high-volume single center indicated a survival benefit of receiving a kidney transplant from an HLA-incompatible live donor as compared with remaining on the waiting list, whether or not a kidney from a deceased donor was received. The generalizability of that finding is unclear.Methods: In a 22-center study, we estimated the survival benefit for 1025 recipients of kidney transplants from HLA-incompatible live donors who were matched with controls who remained on the waiting list or received a transplant from a deceased donor (waiting-list-or-transplant control group) and controls who remained on the waiting list but did not receive a transplant (waiting-list-only control group). We analyzed the data with and without patients from the highest-volume center in the study.Results: Recipients of kidney transplants from incompatible live donors had a higher survival rate than either control group at 1 year (95.0%, vs. 94.0% for the waiting-list-or-transplant control group and 89.6% for the waiting-list-only control group), 3 years (91.7% vs. 83.6% and 72.7%, respectively), 5 years (86.0% vs. 74.4% and 59.2%), and 8 years (76.5% vs. 62.9% and 43.9%) (P<0.001 for all comparisons with the two control groups). The survival benefit was significant at 8 years across all levels of donor-specific antibody: 89.2% for recipients of kidney transplants from incompatible live donors who had a positive Luminex assay for anti-HLA antibody but a negative flow-cytometric cross-match versus 65.0% for the waiting-list-or-transplant control group and 47.1% for the waiting-list-only control group; 76.3% for recipients with a positive flow-cytometric cross-match but a negative cytotoxic cross-match versus 63.3% and 43.0% in the two control groups, respectively; and 71.0% for recipients with a positive cytotoxic cross-match versus 61.5% and 43.7%, respectively. The findings did not change when patients from the highest-volume center were excluded.Conclusions: This multicenter study validated single-center evidence that patients who received kidney transplants from HLA-incompatible live donors had a substantial survival benefit as compared with patients who did not undergo transplantation and those who waited for transplants from deceased donors. (Funded by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases.). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As a result of the increasing number of transplants being facilitated by kidney paired donation and newer initiatives such as voucher donation, end-chain (EC) kidneys now constitute a considerable proportion of kidney paired donation transplants in the United States. Data on EC kidneys are limited. They may be lower in quality compared with non-EC living donor kidneys. However, they can provide unique opportunities for recipient candidates without living donors. There are no data or algorithms available to guide recipient selection for EC kidneys accepted by a transplant center. Considering the ethical principles of utility, justice, and respect for persons that underlie organ allocation, we discuss 3 potential approaches for recipient selection: (1) adherence to the kidney allocation system, (2) utility maximization; and (3) priority to high-risk candidates, along with examples from our own center's experience. Similar considerations are also relevant to selection of recipients for nondirected donor organs and to out-of-sequence allocation for deceased organ donors. Because EC kidneys represent an increasing proportion of kidney paired donation-facilitated living kidney donor transplantation in the United States and will likely get more medically and surgically complex over time, ongoing research on their utilization and outcomes is needed., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interests The authors of this manuscript have conflicts of interest to disclose as described by the American Journal of Transplantation. C.T. is a member of the OPTN MPSC, the ASTS Ethics Committee, the TTS Ethics Committee, and AST PSECOP Executive Committee. The views expressed in this manuscript are her own and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN), nor any other organization with which she is affiliated., (Copyright © 2024 American Society of Transplantation & American Society of Transplant Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The number of living kidney donors in the United States has declined since 2005, with variations based on the donor-recipient relationship. The reasons for this decline are unclear, and strategies to mitigate declined donations remain elusive. We examined the change in donor number monthly (within-year) versus annually (between-years) to inform potentially modifiable factors for future interventions., Methods: In this registry-based cohort analysis of 141 759 living kidney donors between 1995 and 2019, we used linear mixed-effects models for donor number per month and year to analyze between-year and within-year variation in donation. We used Poisson regression to quantify the change in the number of donors per season before and after 2005, stratified by donor-recipient relationship and zip-code household income tertile., Results: We observed a consistent summer surge in donations during June, July, and August. This surge was statistically significant for related donors (incidence rate ratio [IRR] range: 1.12-1.33) and unrelated donors (IRR range: 1.06-1.16) across donor income tertiles., Conclusion: Our findings indicate lower rates of living kidney donation in non-summer months across income tertiles. Interventions are needed to address barriers to donation in non-summer seasons and facilitate donations throughout the year. Since the Organ Donor Leave Law provides a solid foundation for supporting year-round donation, extending the law's provisions beyond federal employees may mitigate identified seasonal barriers., (© 2024 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Since February 2020, exception points have been allocated equivalent to the median model for end-stage liver disease at transplant within 250 nautical miles of the transplant center (MMaT/250). We compared transplant rate and waitlist mortality for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) exception, non-HCC exception, and non-exception candidates to determine whether MMaT/250 advantages (or disadvantages) exception candidates., Methods: Using Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients data, we identified 23 686 adult, first-time, active, deceased donor liver transplant (DDLT) candidates between February 4, 2020, and February 3, 2022. We compared DDLT rates using Cox regression, and waitlist mortality/dropout using competing risks regression in non-exception versus HCC versus non-HCC candidates., Results: Within 24 mo of study entry, 58.4% of non-exception candidates received DDLT, compared with 57.8% for HCC candidates and 70.5% for non-HCC candidates. After adjustment, HCC candidates had 27% lower DDLT rate (adjusted hazard ratio =  0.68 0.73 0.77 ) compared with non-exception candidates. However, waitlist mortality for HCC was comparable to non-exception candidates (adjusted subhazard ratio [asHR] =  0.93 1.03 1.15 ). Non-HCC candidates with pulmonary complications of cirrhosis or cholangiocarcinoma had substantially higher risk of waitlist mortality compared with non-exception candidates (asHR =  1.27 1.70 2.29 for pulmonary complications of cirrhosis, 1.35 2.04 3.07 for cholangiocarcinoma). The same was not true of non-HCC candidates with exceptions for other reasons (asHR =  0.54 0.88 1.44 )., Conclusions: Under MMaT/250, HCC, and non-exception candidates have comparable risks of dying before receiving liver transplant, despite lower transplant rates for HCC. However, non-HCC candidates with pulmonary complications of cirrhosis or cholangiocarcinoma have substantially higher risk of dying before receiving liver transplant; these candidates may merit increased allocation priority., Competing Interests: This work was supported by grants R01DK132395 (A.B.M.) from the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases and K24AI144954 (D.S.) from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. The other authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

SARS-CoV-2 causes persistent infections in a subset of individuals, which is a major clinical and public health problem that should be prioritised for further investigation for several reasons. First, persistent SARS-CoV-2 infection often goes unrecognised, and therefore might affect a substantial number of people, particularly immunocompromised individuals. Second, the formation of tissue reservoirs (including in non-respiratory tissues) might underlie the pathophysiology of the persistent SARS-CoV-2 infection and require new strategies for diagnosis and treatment. Finally, persistent SARS-CoV-2 replication, particularly in the setting of suboptimal immune responses, is a possible source of new, divergent virus variants that escape pre-existing immunity on the individual and population levels. Defining optimal diagnostic and treatment strategies for patients with persistent virus replication and monitoring viral evolution are therefore urgent medical and public health priorities., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests HMM was awarded funding for this work by the US National Institutes of Health (grant number T32AI055397). HMM, DHO'C, and TCF are funded by Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) contract 75D30121C11060. AMH and NDG are supported by CDC contract 75D30122C14697. DHO, TCF, and MCJ have a provisional patent on cryptic lineages covering methods for using viral sequences detected in wastewater to forecast and evaluate viral variants that might become dominant in the general population in the future. DHO has a pending patent on membrane-specific antibody responses that describes that the membrane ectodomain is a frequent target of SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies and that this region could be used instead of or in addition to other serological diagnostics. JGW, PJH, JEL, AP, and WW declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) are a vulnerable immunocompromised population at risk of severe COVID-19 disease and mortality after SARS-CoV-2 infection. We sought to characterize the post-infection sequelae in KTRs at our center., Methods: We studied all adult KTRs (with a functioning allograft) who had their first episode of SARS-CoV-2 infection between 04/2020 and 04/2022. Outcomes of interest included risk factors for hospitalization, all-cause mortality, COVID-19-related mortality, and allograft failure., Results: Of 979 KTRs with SARS-CoV-2 infection, 381 (39%) were hospitalized. In the multivariate analysis, risk factors for hospitalization included advanced age/year (HR: 1.03, 95% CI: 1.02-1.04), male sex (HR: 1.29, 95% CI: 1.04-1.60), non-white race (HR: 1.48, 95% CI: 1.17-1.88), and diabetes as a cause of ESKD (HR: 1.77, 95% CI: 1.41-2.21). SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination was associated with decreased risk of hospitalization (HR: 0.73, 95% CI: 0.59-0.90), all-cause mortality (HR: 0.52, 95% CI: 0.37-0.74), and COVID-19-related mortality (HR: 0.47, 95% CI: 0.31-0.71) in the univariate and multivariate analyses. Risk factors for both all-cause and COVID-19-related mortality in the multivariate analyses included advanced age, hospitalization, and respiratory symptoms for hospital admission. Furthermore, additional risk factors for all-cause mortality in the multivariate analysis included being a non-white recipient and diabetes as a cause of ESKD, with being a recipient of a living donor as protective., Conclusions: Hospitalization due to COVID-19-associated symptoms is associated with increased mortality. Vaccination is a protective factor against hospitalization and mortality., Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Emily E. Zona et al.)

Background: Kidney transplant outcomes have dramatically improved since the first successful transplant in 1954. In its early years, kidney transplantation was viewed more skeptically. Today it is considered the treatment of choice among patients with end-stage kidney disease., Methods: Our program performed its first kidney transplant in 1966 and recently performed our 12 000th kidney transplant. Here, we review and describe our experience with these 12 000 transplants. Transplant recipients were analyzed by decade of date of transplant: 1966-1975, 1976-1985, 1986-1995, 1996-2005, 2006-2015, and 2016-2022. Death-censored graft failure and mortality were outcomes of interest., Results: Of 12 000 kidneys, 247 were transplanted from 1966 to 1975, 1147 from 1976 to 1985, 2194 from 1986 to 1995, 3147 from 1996 to 2005, 3046 from 2006 to 2015, and 2219 from 2016 to 2022 compared with 1966-1975, there were statistically significant and progressively lower risks of death-censored graft failure at 1 y, 5 y, and at last follow-up in all subsequent eras. Although mortality at 1 y was lower in all subsequent eras after 1986-1995, there was no difference in mortality at 5 y or the last follow-up between eras., Conclusions: In this large cohort of 12 000 kidneys from a single center, we observed significant improvement in outcomes over time. Kidney transplantation remains a robust and ever-growing and improving field., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Transplantation Direct. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

Background: The use of large-scale data and artificial intelligence (AI) to support complex transplantation decisions is in its infancy. Transplant candidate decision-making, which relies heavily on subjective assessment (ie, high variability), provides a ripe opportunity for AI-based clinical decision support (CDS). However, AI-CDS for transplant applications must consider important concerns regarding fairness (ie, health equity). The objective of this study was to use human-centered design methods to elicit providers' perceptions of AI-CDS for liver transplant listing decisions., Methods: In this multicenter qualitative study conducted from December 2020 to July 2021, we performed semistructured interviews with 53 multidisciplinary liver transplant providers from 2 transplant centers. We used inductive coding and constant comparison analysis of interview data., Results: Analysis yielded 6 themes important for the design of fair AI-CDS for liver transplant listing decisions: (1) transparency in the creators behind the AI-CDS and their motivations; (2) understanding how the AI-CDS uses data to support recommendations (ie, interpretability); (3) acknowledgment that AI-CDS could mitigate emotions and biases; (4) AI-CDS as a member of the transplant team, not a replacement; (5) identifying patient resource needs; and (6) including the patient's role in the AI-CDS., Conclusions: Overall, providers interviewed were cautiously optimistic about the potential for AI-CDS to improve clinical and equitable outcomes for patients. These findings can guide multidisciplinary developers in the design and implementation of AI-CDS that deliberately considers health equity., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases.)

Backgrounds: It is not known which of the 5 components of the Fried frailty score have the most predictive value for outcomes in simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplant (SPK) and solitary pancreas transplant (SPT) recipients., Methods: In this study, we sought to investigate the association between pretransplant overall frailty and individual frailty components, with posttransplant outcomes among SPK and SPT recipients. Outcomes of interest were length of stay, kidney delayed graft function (K-DGF), readmission within 30 d after discharge, cardiovascular events, acute rejection, pancreas death-censored graft failure (DCGF), kidney DCGF, and death., Results: Of the individual frailty components among SPK (n = 113), only slow walk time was associated with an increased risk of mortality (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 4.99; P = 0.03). Among SPT (n = 49), higher sum frailty scores (coefficient correlation 0.29; P = 0.04) and weight loss (coefficient correlation  = 0.30; P = 0.03) were associated with prolonged length of stay. Similarly, weight loss among SPT was associated with an increased risk of DCGF (aOR: 4.34; P = 0.049). Low grip strength was strongly associated with an increased risk of early readmission (aOR: 13.08; P = 0.008)., Conclusions: We found that not all components of frailty contribute equally to predicting outcomes. Objective measurements of slow walk time, unintentional weight loss, and low grip strength were found to be associated with less optimal outcomes in pancreas transplant recipients. Targeted interventions may improve posttransplant outcomes., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Transplantation Direct. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

Although heart transplantation is the preferred therapy for appropriate patients with advanced heart failure, the presence of concomitant renal or hepatic dysfunction can pose a barrier to isolated heart transplantation. Because donor organ supply limits the availability of organ transplantation, appropriate allocation of this scarce resource is essential; thus, clear guidance for simultaneous heart-kidney transplantation and simultaneous heart-liver transplantation is urgently required. The purposes of this scientific statement are (1) to describe the impact of pretransplantation renal and hepatic dysfunction on posttransplantation outcomes; (2) to discuss the assessment of pretransplantation renal and hepatic dysfunction; (3) to provide an approach to patient selection for simultaneous heart-kidney transplantation and simultaneous heart-liver transplantation and posttransplantation management; and (4) to explore the ethics of multiorgan transplantation.