Search

ImportanceSmall waitlist candidates are significantly less likely than larger candidates to receive a liver transplant.ObjectiveTo investigate the magnitude of the size disparity and test potential policy solutions.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsA decision analytical model was generated to match liver transplant donors to waitlist candidates based on predefined body surface area (BSA) ratio limits (donor BSA divided by recipient BSA). Participants included adult deceased liver transplant donors and waitlist candidates in the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network database from June 18, 2013, to March 20, 2020. Data were analyzed from January 2021 to September 2021.ExposuresCandidates were categorized into 6 groups according to BSA from smallest (group 1) to largest (group 6). Waitlist outcomes were examined. A match run was created for each donor under the current acuity circle liver allocation policy, and the proportion of candidates eligible for a liver based on BSA ratio was calculated. Novel allocation models were then tested.Main Outcomes and MeasuresTime on the waitlist, assigned Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score, and proportion of patients undergoing a transplant were compared by BSA group. Modeling under the current allocation policies was used to determine baseline access to transplant by group. Simulation of novel allocation policies was performed to examine change in access.ResultsThere were 41 341 donors (24 842 [60.1%] male and 16 499 [39.9%] female) and 84 201 waitlist candidates (53 724 [63.8%] male and 30 477 [36.2%] female) in the study. The median age of the donors was 42 years (IQR, 28-55) and waitlist candidates, 57 years (IQR, 50-63). Females were overrepresented in the 2 smallest BSA groups (7100 [84.0%] and 7922 [61.1%] in groups 1 and 2, respectively). For each increase in group number, waitlist time decreased (234 days [IQR, 48-700] for group 1 vs 179 days [IQR, 26-503] for group 6; P P Conclusions and RelevanceIn this study, liver waitlist candidates with the smallest BSAs had a disadvantage due to size. Prioritizing allocation of smaller liver donors to smaller candidates may help overcome this disparity.

Because of the continued demand in kidney transplantation, organs from donors with risk criteria for blood-borne viruses, high Kidney Donor Profile Index (KDPI) kidneys, and hepatitis C virus (HCV)-positive kidneys are being considered. There continues to be reluctance on the part of the providers and the candidates to accept HCV-positive kidneys.We conducted a retrospective analysis of the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network database of all adult (≥18 y old) recipients undergoing kidney transplant from May 10, 2013, to June 30, 2021. We compared patient and graft survival in candidates who received HCV-positive kidneys versus non-hepatitis C (Hep C) high KDPI kidneys by estimated posttransplant survival (EPTS) groups.HCV-viremic kidneys were transplanted in 5.6% of patients in the EPTS61% group compared with 5.1% of patients in the 21%-60% EPTS group and 1.9% of 0%-20% EPTS group ( P0.001). Of all transplants performed in the EPTS 61%-100% group, 11.9% were KDPI85% compared with 5.2% in the EPTS 21%-60%, and 0.5% in the EPTS 0%-20%. Patient survival was significantly longer at 1, 3, and 5 y in the EPTS61% group who received Hep C-viremic or -nonviremic allografts compared with non-Hep C kidneys with KDPI85%. When it comes to listing, only 25% of candidates in the EPTS61% group were listed for Hep C nucleic acid testing-positive kidneys in 2021.Our findings could be used for counseling candidates on the types of kidneys they should consider for transplantation. Also, listing practices for viremic Hep C kidneys need continued re-evaluation.

Despite data showing equivalent outcomes between grafts from marginal versus standard criteria deceased liver donors, elevated donor transaminases constitute a frequent reason to decline potential livers. We assessed the effect of donor transaminase levels and other characteristics on graft survival.We performed a retrospective cohort analysis of adult first deceased donor liver transplant recipients with available transaminase levels registered in the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network database (2008-2018). We used Cox proportional hazards regression to determine the effects of donor characteristics on graft survival.Of 53 913 liver transplants, 52 158 were allografts from donors with low transaminases (≤ 500 U/L; group A) and 1755 were from donors with elevated transaminases (500 U/L; group B). Group A recipients were more likely to be hospitalized (P = .01) or in intensive care (P.001) or to have mechanical assistance (P.001), portal vein thrombosis (P = .01), diabetes mellitus (P = .003), or dialysis the week before liver transplant (P = .004). Multivariable analysis (controlling for recipient characteristics) showed donor risk factors of graft failure included diabetes mellitus (P.001), donation after cardiac death (P.001), total bilirubin3.5 mg/dL (P.001), serum creatinine1.5 mg/dL (P = .01), and cold ischemia time6 hours (P.001). Regional organ sharing showed lower risk of graft failure (P = .02). Donor transaminases500 U/L were not associated with graft failure (relative risk, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.91-1.14; P = .74).Donor transaminases500 U/L should not preclude the use of liver grafts. Instead, donor total bilirubin3.5 mg/dL and serum creatinine1.5 mg/dL appear to be associated with higher likelihood of graft failure after liver transplant.

Objectives Kidney transplant is the optimal treatment for patients with end-stage renal disease. The effects of using machine perfusion for donor kidneys with varying Kidney Donor Profile Index scores are unknown. We sought to assess the impact of machine perfusion on the incidence of delayed graft function in different score groups of kidney grafts classified with the Kidney Donor Profile Index. Materials and methods We conducted a retrospective analysis from January 2008 through September 2017 of adult recipients (≥ 18 years old) undergoing kidney-only transplant from deceased donors. All transplant recipients were followed until December 2017. Recipients who received multiorgan transplants or kidneys from living donors were excluded from our analyses. Recipients were divided according to 5 donor categories of Kidney Donor Profile Index scores (0-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, and 81-100). Logistic regression analysis was performed for each score group to determine the effects of machine perfusion on development of delayed graft function within each score group. Results Our study included 101222 recipients who met the inclusion criteria. Multivariate analysis revealed that machine perfusion was associated with significantly decreased development of delayed graft function only in donors with high-risk profiles: the 61 to 80 score group (odds ratio = 0.83; confidence interval, 0.78-0.89) and the 81 to 100 score group (odds ratio = 0.72; confidence interval, 0.67-0.78). Conclusions Machine perfusion is beneficial in reducing delayed graft function only in donor kidneys with a higher risk profile.

Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, medical schools were forced to adapt clinical curricula. The University of Washington School of Medicine created a hybrid in person and virtual general surgery clerkship.The third year general surgery clerkship was modified to a 4-week in person and 2-week virtual clerkship to accommodate the same number of learners in less time. All students completed a survey to assess the impact of the virtual clerkship.The students preferred faculty lectures over national modules in the virtual clerkship. 58.6% indicated they would prefer the virtual component before the in-person experience. There was no change from previous years in final grades or clerkship exam scores after this hybrid curriculum.If the need for a virtual general surgery curriculum arises again in the future, learners value this experience at the beginning of the clerkship and prefer faculty lectures over national modules.

General surgery remains a male-dominated specialty. Women constitute 54% of medical students at the University of Washington, but only 3.4% of full professors within the Department of Surgery. Many believe surgical attrition and "the leaky pipeline" starts during medical school clerkships, but the exact deterrents remain undefined. This study examined the impact of gender on grading during the third-year surgical clerkship.Retrospective analysis of confidential final clerkship grades, examination scores and subjective clerkship grades was conducted. These were compared by gender, time period, and type of clerkship site. Chi-square analyses were performed.Clerkship sites across multiple academic (n = 6) and nonacademic (n = 14) locations.All third-year medical students undergoing a core surgical clerkship over 2 time periods-2007 to 2010 (period 1) and 2016 to 2019 (period 2)-were included.There were 539 medical students in period 1 and 792 in period 2. The percentage of women was stable over time (52.0% vs 54.2%, p = 0.43). Final clerkship grades of Honors increased significantly from period 1 to 2 (22.3% vs 44.3%, p0.0001) and was similarly distributed by gender (women: 21.4% vs 48.0%, p0.0001; men 23.2% vs 39.9%, p0.0001). Honors on examinations remained stable over time and did not differ by gender. Women earned more final clerkship honors than men at academic sites in period 2 (48.4% vs 30.9%, p0.001). This finding was not identified in period 1, nor at nonacademic sites.There was a significant increase in surgical clerkship honors over the past decade, independent of gender. Women attained more clinical and final clerkship honors than men and similar exam grades as time progressed, suggesting that gender bias in the subjective grading of women at this institution does not directly contribute to the loss of talented women as they progress from medical student to faculty within the department, with said gender imbalance not related to clerkship evaluations.

Acute graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) is a rare complication after orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) that carries high mortality. We hypothesized that machine-learning algorithms to predict rare events would identify patients at high risk for developing GVHD. To develop a predictive model, we retrospectively evaluated the clinical features of 1938 donor-recipient pairs at the time they underwent OLT at our center; 19 (1.0%) of these recipients developed GVHD. This population was divided into training (70%) and test (30%) sets. A total of 7 machine-learning classification algorithms were built based on the training data set to identify patients at high risk for GVHD. The C5.0, heterogeneous ensemble, and generalized gradient boosting machine (GGBM) algorithms predicted that 21% to 28% of the recipients in the test data set were at high risk for developing GVHD, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of 0.83 to 0.86. The 7 algorithms were then evaluated in a validation data set of 75 more recent donor-recipient pairs who underwent OLT at our center; 2 of these recipients developed GVHD. The logistic regression, heterogeneous ensemble, and GGBM algorithms predicted that 9% to 11% of the validation recipients were at high risk for developing GVHD, with an AUROC of 0.93 to 0.96 that included the 2 recipients who developed GVHD. In conclusion, we present a practical model that can identify patients at high risk for GVHD who may warrant additional monitoring with peripheral blood chimerism testing.

Among solid organ transplant recipients, donor cytomegalovirus (CMV) seropositive (D+) and recipient seronegative (R-) status are associated with an increased risk of graft loss and mortality after kidney or lung transplantation. Whether a similar relationship exists among liver transplant recipients (LTR) is unknown. We assessed graft loss and mortality among adult LTRs from January 1, 2010, to March 14, 2020, in the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network database. We used multivariable mixed Cox proportional hazards regression to analyze the association of donor and recipient CMV serostatus group with graft loss and mortality, with donor seronegative (D-) and recipient seronegative (R-) as the reference group. Among 54,078 LTRs, the proportion of D-R-, D- and recipient seropositive (R+), D+R-, and D+R+ was 13.4%, 22.5%, 22%, and 42%, respectively. By unadjusted Kaplan-Meier survival curve estimates, survival by the end of follow-up was 73.3%, 73.5%, 70.1%, and 69.7%, among the D-R-, D-R+, D+R-, and D+R+ groups, respectively. By multivariable Cox regression, the CMV D+R- serogroup, but not other serogroups, was independently associated with increased risks of graft loss (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.13; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05-1.22) and mortality (aHR, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.05-1.22). The magnitude of the association of the CMV D+R- serostatus group with mortality was similar when the Cox regression analysis was restricted to the first year after transplant and beyond the first year after transplant: aHR, 1.13 (95% CI, 1.01-1.27) and aHR, 1.13 (95% CI, 1.02-1.25), respectively. Even in an era of CMV preventive strategies, CMV D+R- serogroup status remains independently associated with increased graft loss and mortality in adult LTRs. Factors in addition to direct CMV-associated short-term mortality are likely, and studies to define the underlying mechanism(s) are warranted.

Background. As the rate of early postoperative complications decline after transplant with pediatric donation after circulatory death (DCD) kidneys, attention has shifted to the long-term consequences of donor–recipient (D-R) size disparity given the pernicious systemic effects of inadequate functional nephron mass. Methods. We conducted a retrospective cohort study using Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network data for all adult (aged ≥18 y) recipients of pediatric (aged 0–17 y) DCD kidneys in the United States from January 1, 2004 to March 10, 2020. Results. DCD pediatric allografts transplanted between D-R pairs with a body surface area (BSA) ratio of 0.10–0.70 carried an increased risk of all-cause graft failure (relative risk [RR], 1.36; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.10–1.69) and patient death (RR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.01–1.73) when compared with pairings with a ratio of >0.91. Conversely, similar graft and patient survivals were demonstrated among the >0.70–0.91 and >0.91 cohorts. Furthermore, we found no difference in death-censored graft survival between all groups. Survival analysis revealed improved 10-y patient survival in recipients of en bloc allografts (P = 0.02) compared with recipients of single kidneys with D-R BSA ratios of 0.10–0.70. A similar survival advantage was demonstrated in recipients of solitary allografts with D-R BSA ratios >0.70 compared with the 0.10–0.70 cohort (P = 0.02). Conclusions. Inferior patient survival is likely associated with systemic sequelae of insufficient renal functional capacity in size-disparate DCD kidney recipients, which can be overcome by appropriate BSA matching or en bloc transplantation. We therefore suggest that in DCD kidney transplantation, D-R BSA ratios of 0.10–0.70 serve as criteria for en bloc allocation or alternative recipient selection to optimize the D-R BSA ratio to >0.70.

In this era of organ scarcity, living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is an alternative to using deceased donors, and in Western countries, it is more often used for recipients with low Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) scores. We sought to compare the patient survival and graft survival between recipients of liver transplantation from living donors and donation after circulatory death (DCD) donors in patients with low MELD scores. This is a retrospective cohort analysis of adult liver transplant recipients with a laboratory MELD of ≤20 who underwent transplantation between January 1, 2003 and March 31, 2016. Recipients were categorized by donor graft type (DCD or LDLT), and recipient and donor characteristics were compared. Ten-year patient and graft survival curves were calculated using Kaplan-Meier analyses, and a mixed-effects model was performed to determine the contributions of recipient, donor, and center variables on patient and graft survival. There were 36,705 liver transplants performed: 32,255 (87.9%) from DBD donors, 2166 (5.9%) from DCD donors, and 2284 (6.2%) from living donors. In the mixed-effects model, DCD status was associated with a higher risk of graft failure (relative risk [RR], 1.27; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.16-1.38) but not worse patient survival (RR, 1.27; 95% CI, 0.96-1.67). Lower DCD center experience was associated with a 1.21 higher risk of patient death (95% CI, 1.17-1.25) and a 1.13 higher risk of graft failure (95% CI, 1.12-1.15). LDLT center experience was also predictive of patient survival (RR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.02-1.03) and graft failure (RR, 1.05; 95% CI, 1.05-1.06). In conclusion, for liver transplant recipients with low laboratory MELD, LDLT offers better graft survival and a tendency to better patient survival than DCD donors.

BACKGROUND Socioeconomic status has been associated with inferior outcomes after multiple surgical procedures, but has not been well studied with respect to pediatric liver transplantation. This study evaluated the impact of insurance status (as a proxy for socioeconomic status) on patient and allograft survival in pediatric first-time liver transplant recipients. METHODS Our retrospective analysis of the UNOS data base from January 2002 through September 2017 revealed 6997 pediatric patients undergoing first-time isolated liver transplantation. A mixed Cox proportional hazards model adjusted for donor, recipient, and program characteristics determined the RR of insurance status on allograft and patient survival. All results were considered significant at P

Background. Risk factors for cytomegalovirus (CMV) viremia in CMV seropositive liver transplant recipients are incompletely defined and have focused primarily on recipient factors. We hypothesized that active CMV replication (CMV viremia) in seropositive donors might increase the risk for CMV viremia in recipients, as reported for other viruses in organ transplantation. Methods. From January 3, 2009, to July 27, 2015, stored plasma from consecutive CMV seropositive liver donors was retrospectively tested for CMV viremia by PCR. From April 20, 2012, to July 27, 2015, CMV seropositive recipients of a liver transplant from the donors during this time period received preemptive therapy for CMV prevention (valganciclovir therapy for CMV viremia ≥250 IU/mL). The association of recipient factors and donor CMV viremia with viremia in recipients was assessed. Results. Among 317 CMV-seropositive donors, CMV viremia was detected in 11 (3.5%) and was associated with longer time to collection after admission and bacteremia. Among 115 CMV-seropositive liver recipients, 5 (4.3%) received an organ from a donor with CMV viremia. Donor CMV viremia was independently associated with higher incidence of CMV viremia ≥250 IU/mL and shorter time to onset of CMV viremia ≥250 IU/mL in recipients: 4 (80%) versus 26 (23.6%), P = 0.02, and hazard ratio 8.55 (2.60–28.10), P = 0.003, respectively. Conclusion. Donor CMV reactivation is associated with CMV viremia in seropositive orthotopic liver transplant recipients receiving preemptive therapy, identifying a novel potential risk factor for CMV infection in seropositive liver transplant recipients. Future studies should independently validate and assess these findings in other organ transplant settings.

Background Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) and donation after circulatory death (DCD) can expand the donor pool for cholestatic liver disease (CLD) patients. We sought to compare the outcomes of deceased donor liver transplant (DDLT) vs LDLT in CLD patients. Methods Retrospective cohort analysis of adult CLD recipients registered in the OPTN database who received primary LT between 2002 and 2018. Cox proportional hazards regression models with mixed effects were used to determine the impact of graft type on patient and graft survival. Results Five thousand, nine hundred ninety-nine DDLT (5730 donation after brain death [DBD], 269 DCD) and 912 LDLT recipients were identified. Ten-year patient/graft survival rates were DBD: 73.8%/67.9%, DCD: 74.7%/60.7%, and LDLT: 82.5%/73.9%. Higher rates of biliary complications as a cause of graft failure were seen in DCD (56.8%) than LDLT (30.5%) or DBD (18.7%) recipients. On multivariable analysis, graft type was not associated with patient mortality, while DCD was independently associated with graft failure (P = .046). Conclusion DBD, DCD, and LDLT were associated with comparable overall patient survival. No difference in the risk of graft failure could be observed between LDLT and DBD. DCD can be an acceptable alternative to DBD with equivalent patient survival, but inferior graft survival likely related to the high rate of biliary complications.

Adult liver transplant programs have heretofore been hesitant to perform liver retransplantation in adult patients who underwent primary liver transplantation as a child (P_A). Areas of concern include: (a) potential disruption in care when transferring from a pediatric to an adult transplant center; (b) generally inferior outcomes of retransplantation; (c) reputation of young adults for non-adherence to post-transplant regimen; and (d) potential higher work effort for equivalent outcomes. To examine these concerns, we reviewed data on all US liver adult retransplants from 10/01/1987 to 9/30/2017. We propensity matched the P_A patients to patients who received both primary and retransplantation as adults (A_A), with ≥550 days between transplants. A mixed Cox proportional hazards model with program size and time period of transplantation as random variables revealed that retransplantation of P_A patients produced no significantly different graft survival or patient survival rates than retransplantation of the matched A_A patients. Therefore, inferior rates of liver retransplantation in these patients and concerns about continuity of care in changing transplant programs are not as believed in the wider liver transplant community. In conclusion, liver transplant centers should be optimistic about retransplanting adults who received their primary transplants as children.

Background The care of patients in the United States who have ESKD is often shaped by their hopes and prognostic expectations related to kidney transplant. Little is known about how patients' engagement in the transplant process might relate to patterns of end-of-life care. Methods We compared six measures of intensity of end-of-life care among adults in the United States with ESKD who died between 2005 and 2014 after experiencing differing exposure to the kidney transplant process. Results Of 567,832 decedents with ESKD, 27,633 (5%) had a functioning kidney transplant at the time of death, 14,653 (3%) had a failed transplant, 16,490 (3%) had been removed from the deceased donor waitlist, 17,010 (3%) were inactive on the waitlist, 11,529 (2%) were active on the waitlist, and 480,517 (85%) had never been waitlisted for or received a transplant (reference group). In adjusted analyses, compared with the reference group, patients exposed to the transplant process were significantly more likely to have been admitted to an intensive care unit and to have received an intensive procedure in the last 30 days of life; they were also significantly more likely to have died in the hospital. Those who died on the transplant waitlist were also less likely than those in the reference group to have been enrolled in hospice and to have discontinued dialysis before death. Conclusions Patients who had engaged in the kidney transplant process received more intensive patterns of end-of-life care than other patients with ESKD. These findings support the relevance of advance care planning, even for this relatively healthy segment of the ESKD population.

Background Kidney transplants from donors after circulatory death (DCD) make up an increasing proportion of all deceased donor kidney transplants in the United States (US). However, DCD grafts are considered to be of lower quality than kidneys from donors after brain death (DBD). It is unclear whether graft survival is different for these two types of donor kidneys. Materials and methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study of US deceased donor kidney recipients using data from the United Network of Organ Sharing from 12/4/2014 to 6/30/2018. We employed a Cox proportional hazard model with mixed effects to compare all-cause graft loss and death-censored graft loss for DCD versus DBD deceased donor kidney transplant recipients. We used transplant center as the random effects term to account for cluster-specific random effects. In the multivariable analysis, we adjusted for recipient characteristics, donor factors, and transplant logistics. Results Our cohort included 27,494 DBD and 7,770 DCD graft recipients transplanted from 2014 to 2018 who were followed over a median of 1.92 years (IQR 1.08–2.83). For DCD compared with DBD recipients, we did not find a significant difference in all-cause graft loss (hazard ratio [HR] 0.96, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.87–1.05 in univariable and HR 1.03 [95% CI 0.95–1.13] in multivariable analysis) or for death-censored graft loss (HR 0.97 (95% CI 0.91–1.06) in univariable and 1.05 (95% CI 0.99–1.11) in multivariable analysis). Conclusions For a contemporary cohort of deceased donor kidney transplant recipients, we did not find a difference in the likelihood of graft loss for DCD compared with DBD grafts. These findings signal a need for additional investigation into whether DCD status independently contributes to other important outcomes for current kidney transplant recipients and indices of graft quality.

Kidney Donor Risk Index (KDRI) introduced in 2009 included hepatitis C serologic but not viremic status of the donors. With nucleic acid amplification testing (NAT) now being mandatory, further evaluation of these donors is possible. We conducted a retrospective matched case-control analysis of adult deceased donor kidney transplants performed between December 5, 2014 to December 31, 2016 with the KDRI score and hepatitis C virus antibody (HCV Ab) and NAT testing status obtained from the United Network for Organ Sharing database. The 205 aviremic HCV Ab+ NAT - kidney transplants were compared to KDRI matched control kidneys that were HCV Ab-NAT-. The aviremic HCV kidneys were recovered from donors who were significantly younger, more likely to be white, and less likely to have hypertension and diabetes. The majority of the recipients of the aviremic HCV kidneys when compared to matched controls were HCV positive: 90.2% vs 4.3%. The recipients were significantly older, were on dialysis for a shorter time, and were transplanted sooner. The graft survival of aviremic HCV kidneys was similar (P .08). If the HCV status of the aviremic kidneys was assumed to be negative, 122 more kidneys could have been allocated to patients with estimated posttransplant survival20. Seven kidneys would no longer have Kidney Donor Profile Index85%. Further policies might consider these findings to appropriately allocate these kidneys.

BACKGROUND The number of Public Health Service increased-risk organ donors (PHS IRD) is growing, largely from an increase in intravenous drug use overdoses due to the current opioid epidemic. MATERIAL AND METHODS We conducted a retrospective case series review using our single-center data. We reviewed 82 PHS IRD kidney transplant offers between 2015 and 2017, 20 of which were declined. We reviewed outcomes of patients who declined vs. accepted PHS IRD offers. We studied the effect of education on these patients' willingness to consider another PHS IRD. RESULTS Twenty patients declined PHS IRD over a 2-year period. They waited on average 9 months for another transplant, and tended to be transplanted with a higher-KDPI kidney than the one originally offered. Patients who declined PHS IRD were more likely to be predialysis, women, and Asian American, and to require an interpreter. Ninety-two percent of patients who received education on PHS IRD after declining an offer stated that they would consider another PHS IRD offer in the future. Four of these patients received a PHS IRD transplant. CONCLUSIONS Our results suggest that education of patients may have a positive impact on patient attitudes toward PHS IRD.

BACKGROUND During massive transfusion, the volume ratio of administered plasma (PL Vol) to red blood cell (RBC Vol) appears to be associated with reduced blood utilization and improved survival. The aim of this study was to evaluate the optimal component ratio in the setting of liver transplantation. METHODS This is a retrospective chart review of patients who underwent liver transplantation and received at least 500 ml of red blood cells from January 2013 through December 2015. Kernel smoothing analysis determined the proper component ratios to evaluate were a ≥0·85:1 ratio (high) to a ≤0·85:1 ratio (low). Two groups, plasma volume to RBC volume (PL Vol/RBC Vol) and plasma contained in the platelet units added to the plasma calculation [PL + PLT (platelet)] Vol/RBC Vol, were used to evaluate the component ratios. RESULTS A total of 188 patients were included in the analysis. In the PL Vol/RBC Vol evaluation, a low ratio revealed that 1238 ml (977-1653 ml) (P < 0·0001) and 1178 ml (747-1178) (P < 0·0001) of RBC were used in excess compared to the high ratio, in the univariable and multivariable analysis, respectively. In the PL +PLT Vol/RBC Vol evaluation, a low ratio used 734 ml (193-1275) (P = 0·008) and 886 ml (431-1340) (P < 0·0001) of RBC in excess when compared to high ratio in the univariable and multivariable analysis, respectively. CONCLUSION In patients undergoing liver transplantation, the transfusion of plasma to RBC ratio ≥0·85 was associated with decreased need of RBC transfusions.

Aim To examine temporal changes in the indications for liver transplantation (LT) and characteristics of patients transplanted for alcoholic liver disease (ALD). Methods We performed a retrospective cohort analysis of trends in the indication for LT using the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) database between 2002 and 2015. Patients were grouped by etiology of the liver disease and characteristics were compared using χ2 and t-tests. Time series analysis was used identifying any year with a significant change in the number of transplants per year for ALD, and before and after eras were modeled using a general linear model. Subgroup analysis of recipients with ALD was performed by age group, gender, UNOS region and etiology (alcoholic cirrhosis, alcoholic hepatitis and hepatitis C - alcoholic cirrhosis dual listing). Results Of 74216 liver transplant recipients, ALD (n = 9400, 12.7%) was the third leading indication for transplant after hepatitis C and hepatocellular carcinoma. Transplants for ALD, increased from 12.8% (553) in 2002 to 16.5% (1020) in 2015. Time series analysis indicated a significant increase in the number of transplants per year for ALD in 2013 (P = 0.03). There were a stable number of transplants per year between 2002 and 2012 (linear coefficient 3, 95%CI: -4.6, 11.2) an increase of 177 per year between 2013 and 2015 (95%CI: 119, 234). This increase was significant for all age groups except those 71-83 years old, was observed for both genders, and was incompletely explained by a decrease in transplants for hepatitis C and ALD dual listing. All UNOS regions except region 9 saw an increase in the mean number of transplants per year when comparing eras, and this increase was significant in regions 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10 and 11. Conclusion There has been a dramatic increase in the number of transplants for ALD starting in 2013.

Previous studies have grouped all donors positive for hepatitis C virus (HCV) antibody (Ab). Only recently has donor HCV nucleic acid testing (NAT) become routine, and the impact of Ab and NAT status on organ utilization is unknown. Using the United Network for Organ Sharing database, we identified 9290 donors from 2015 to 2016 for whom both HCV Ab and NAT data were available and compared organ utilization by HCV status. Overall, 93.8% of donors were Ab negative and NAT negative (Ab-NAT-), 0.15% were Ab negative and NAT positive, 1.8% were Ab positive and NAT negative (Ab+NAT-), and 4.2% were both Ab and NAT positive (Ab+NAT+). Ab-NAT- donors donated at the highest rate for all organs except livers, of which Ab+NAT- donors donated at a higher rate (81.2% vs 73.2%, p = 0.03). Livers were discarded for reasons related to abnormal biopsies in Ab+NAT+ donors, whereas kidneys from Ab- or NAT-positive donors were discarded for reasons related to HCV status. Using a propensity score-matched model, we estimated that using Ab+NAT- donors at the same rate as Ab-NAT- donors could result in 48 more kidney donors, 37 more heart donors, and 15 more lung donors annually. We urge the use of HCV Ab+NAT- donors for appropriately selected and consenting recipients.

The impact of size mismatch in deceased donor liver transplantation is unknown. BSA has been demonstrated to be an accurate indicator of liver volume. We developed a model to match livers by BSA and estimate the impact of size mismatch on graft survival. Using the Standard Transplant Analysis and Research (STAR) database we selected solitary primary liver transplants recipients of any age, transplanted between 3/6/2002 and 12/31/2016. Using the Cox proportional hazard model, and controlling for donor and recipient factors, we determined the relative risk for graft survival for four donor/recipient body surface area ratio groups (≤0.68, 0.69-0.90, 0.91-1.25, 1.26-1.5). We studied two groups: recipients with a BSA 1.6 (adults) and ≤1.6 (children) and a subgroup with a BSA ≤ 0.53 (small infants). In recipients with BSA 1.6 (adults [n = 71 365]), D/R ratios ≤ 0.68 and 1.25 had a negative impact on graft survival. In recipients with BSA ≤ 1.6 (children [n = 8339]) D/R ratios0.75 and1.25 had a negative impact on graft survival. In the 1725 recipients with BSA ≤ 0.53 (small infants) D/R ratios1 and2.3 had a negative impact on graft survival. In deceased donor liver transplantation, the D/R ratio is a significant, yet underestimated predictor of graft survival that should be considered in donor and recipient selection.

BACKGROUND Young children and small-statured candidates are dying on liver candidate waitlists. The Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network and United Network for Organ Sharing have proposed a split liver (SL) variance encouraging transplant programs to split more livers to aid these smaller statured candidates. METHODS We evaluated the US experience of splitting donor livers during 2002-2016. The results of our analysis provide new evidence to support this variance. RESULTS During 2002-2016, SL grafts from 935 donors were transplanted into 1870 recipients. Controlling for recipient factors and using time period and program identification as random variables, a multivariable mixed Cox proportional hazards model for graft failure revealed that donor aged 3-10 years had a relative risk (RR) of 3.94 (2.86-5.44), and donor aged >30 years had a RR of 1.94 (1.59-2.35) for graft failure. Donor-to-recipient body surface area ratio

The opioid epidemic has resulted in increasing the incidence of hepatitis C virus in the general population and more deceased organ donors with hepatitis C in the United States. We aim to describe how the changing donor landscape affects patterns of liver and kidney transplantation among donors, waitlist candidates, and transplanted recipients.Using data supplied by the United Network for Organ Sharing, we examined donor hepatitis C virus antibody (Ab) and nucleic acid testing (NAT) status, center waitlist patterns, and liver and kidney transplants and discards between 2015 and 2017 by 6-month periods.We observed an increase in donors with any marker of the hepatitis C virus (n = 283 [6.2%] in period 1 to n = 384 [7.4%] in period 5, P = .008) and antibody positive nucleic acid testing negative donors (n = 81 [1.8%] in period 1 to n = 131 [2.5%] in period 5, P.001). We observed a significant increase in aviremic recipients of liver transplants from antibody positive nucleic acid testing negative donors (n = 1 [1.7%] in period 1, to n = 27 [31.0%] in period 5, P = .005) and a significant decrease in the antibody positive nucleic acid testing positive liver discard rate (P = .01). By the end of the study, 75.8% (n = 97) of recipients of antibody positive nucleic acid testing negative kidneys were hepatitis C virus negative, an increase from 10.6% (n = 5) in period 1.The number of donors with the hepatitis C virus is increasing. We observed a concomitant increase in the transplantation of kidneys and livers from aviremic donors, and the recipient population of these organs is increasingly hepatitis C virus negative.

Under the new kidney allocation system (KAS), implemented in 2014, the distribution of the best quality donor kidney grafts shifted between age groups, but it is unclear whether this change translates to meaningful differences in post-transplant outcomes. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 20,345 deceased donor kidney transplant recipients before and 4,605 recipients after implementation of the KAS using data from the United Network of Organ Sharing. Overall, two-year mortality was greater among recipients in the post-KAS era compared with the pre-KAS era (6.31% vs 5.91% respectively, [p = 0.01]), and two-year graft loss was not significantly different between eras (9.95% and 9.65%, respectively [p = 0.13]). In analysis stratified by age group (18-45, 46-55, 56-65, and ≥66 years), relative risk of mortality was 1.48 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.09-1.98) among recipients 46-55 years old and 1.47 (95% CI 1.18-1.81) among recipients 56-65 years old. Relative risk of all-cause graft loss was 1.43 (95% CI 1.20-1.70) among recipients 56-65 years old. There were no significant differences in relative risk of mortality or graft loss associated with the KAS era among other age groups. After adjustment for recipient characteristics and characteristics of the changing donor pool, relative risk of two-year mortality and graft loss associated with the post-KAS era was attenuated for recipients aged 46-55 and 56-65 years, but remained statistically significant. In this early analysis after implementation of the KAS, there is suggestion that increased risk of mortality and graft loss may be disproportionately borne by middle-aged recipients, which is only partially accounted for by changes in recipient and donor characteristics. These findings signal a need to continue to monitor the effects of the KAS to ensure that allocation practices both maximize utility of the kidney graft pool and respect fairness between age groups.

BACKGROUND Implementation of the Kidney Allocation System (KAS) changed how kidneys are allocated and the information on which organ utilization decisions are based. We aimed to evaluate how KAS implementation changed kidney utilization and recipient outcomes. MATERIAL AND METHODS Using the United Network for Organ Sharing database, we identified recipients of kidney transplants from donors with kidney donor profile index (KDPI) of 61-90% in the 5-years pre- and 18-months post-KAS implementation and examined patient and graft survival and donor kidney discard rates based on standard criteria donor (SCD) or expanded criteria donor (ECD) status. RESULTS The proportion of ECD kidneys was unchanged pre- versus post-KAS. Post-KAS, SCD kidneys were less likely to be transplanted into young recipients while ECD kidneys were more likely to be transplanted. SCD kidneys in the post-KAS period conferred a 1.42 (95% CI: 1.18-1.73) times higher adjusted mortality and 2% lower 1-year survival (94.2% vs. 96.2%, P

Blood utilization during liver transplant has decreased, but remains highly variable due to many complex surgical and physiologic factors. Previous models attempted to predict utilization using preoperative variables to stratify cases into two usage groups, usually using entire blood units for measurement. We sought to develop a practical predictive model using specific transfusion volumes (in ml) to develop a data-driven patient blood management strategy.This is a retrospective evaluation of primary liver transplants at a single institution from 2013 to 2015. Multivariable analysis of preoperative recipient and donor factors was used to develop a model predictive of intraoperative red-blood-cell (pRBC) use.Of 256 adult liver transplants, 207 patients had complete transfusion volume data for analysis. The median intraoperative allogeneic pRBC transfusion volume was 1250 ml, and the average was 1563 ± 1543 ml. Preoperative haemoglobin, spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, preoperative haemodialysis and preoperative international normalized ratio together yielded the strongest model predicting pRBC usage. When it predicted1250 ml of pRBCs, all cases with 0 ml transfused were captured and only 8·6% of the time1250 ml were used. This prediction had a sensitivity of 0·91 and a specificity of 0·89. If predicted usage was2000 ml, 75% of the time blood loss exceeded 2000 ml.Patients likely to require low or high pRBC transfusion volumes were identified with excellent accuracy using this predictive model at our institution. This model may help predict bleeding risk for each patient and facilitate optimized blood ordering.

Introduction The decision for isolated kidney transplant (KT) vs. combined liver–kidney transplant (CLKT) in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) with compensated cirrhosis remains controversial. We sought to determine outcomes of patients requiring listing for a liver transplant (LT) following either a cadaveric or living donor KT and compare these outcomes to similar patients receiving a CLKT. Methods Our dataset included the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS)/Standard Transplant and Analysis and Research (STAR) kidney files from 1987 to 2012 after being joined with the liver files from 2002 to 2012. Outcomes of patients who received a CLKT with an international normalized ratio (INR) ≤1 and total bilirubin ≤1 were compared to patients who received a primary KT and subsequently required listing for LT between zero and five yr or after five yr. Results For the three groups, 244 patients had a CLKT, 216 were wait-listed for LT between zero and five yr after KT (0–5 WL), and 320 were wait-listed five yr after KT (+5 WL). From the time of KT, the 0–5 WL group had significantly worse survival than the CLKT group and the +5 WL group. The +5 WL had the best survival of all groups. For the 0–5 WL group, 45% underwent LT and 40% died while waiting compared to the +5 WL group with 53% having LT and 26% died while waiting. At the time of LT, the 0–5 WL group had a higher model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score, higher incidence of being in the ICU at the time of transplant, and higher incidence of requiring life support. From the time of LT, the CLKT trended toward better survival (p = 0.0549) than both the 0–5 WL and +5 WL groups, which had equivalent survival. Conclusion The 0–5 WL group is a higher risk group with poorer survival due to a higher incidence of dying on the waitlist. Better identification of patients with a high risk for hepatic decompensation following KT and agreement for regional exception for LT in the event of decompensation may improve utilization of organs and better survival for those patients.

The new kidney allocation system (KAS) intends to allocate the top 20% of kidneys to younger recipients with longer life expectancy. We hypothesized that the new KAS would lead to greater allocation of Public Health Service (PHS) increased-risk donor organs to younger recipients.Analyses of the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network data of patients who underwent primary deceased kidney transplantation were performed in pre- and post-KAS periods.The allocation of PHS increased-risk kidney allografts in various age groups changed significantly after implementation of the new KAS, with an increased proportion of younger individuals receiving increased-risk kidneys (7% vs 10% in age group 20-29 y and 13% vs 18% in age group 30-39 y before and after KAS, respectively; P .0001). This trend was reversed in recipients 50-59 years old, with 31% in the pre-KAS period compared with 26% after KAS (P .0001).The new KAS resulted in a substantial increase in allocation of PHS increased-risk kidneys to candidates in younger age groups. Because increased-risk kidneys are generally underutilized, future efforts to optimize the utilization of these organs should target younger recipients and their providers.

Rapid diagnosis of disease states using less invasive, safer, and more clinically acceptable approaches than presently employed is a crucial direction for the field of medicine. While MS-based proteomics approaches have attempted to meet these objectives, challenges such as the enormous dynamic range of protein concentrations in clinically relevant biofluid samples coupled with the need to address human biodiversity have slowed their employment. Herein, we report on the use of a new instrumental platform that addresses these challenges by coupling technical advances in rapid gas phase multiplexed ion mobility spectrometry separations with liquid chromatography and MS to dramatically increase measurement sensitivity and throughput, further enabling future high throughput MS-based clinical applications. An initial application of the liquid chromatography - ion mobility spectrometry-MS platform analyzing blood serum samples from 60 postliver transplant patients with recurrent fibrosis progression and 60 nontransplant patients illustrates its potential utility for disease characterization.

Renal biopsy has been proposed to determine the cause or reversibility of renal failure for patients with end-stage liver disease and may be useful in the kidney allocation. Nevertheless, little data exist to validate the usefulness of kidney biopsies in this patient population.We evaluated the utility of renal biopsies in a cohort of 59 consecutive liver transplant candidates with renal impairment of unclear etiology referred to determine the need for simultaneous liver kidney transplantation (SLK) versus liver alone transplantation (LAT). Pathological diagnoses, patient outcomes and the usefulness of biopsy results in predicting renal recovery were analyzed.Our biopsy complication rate was relatively low with only 2.9% and 4.2% serious complications occurring with transjugular and percutaneous renal biopsies, respectively. The most common pathological diagnoses on renal biopsies were membranoproliferative glomerulonephritis (23%) followed by IgA nephropathy (19%) and acute tubular injury (19%). Simultaneous liver kidney transplantation was recommended for patients with greater than 40% global glomerular sclerosis, or with interstitial fibrosis greater than 30% or for patients on hemodialysis for 2 months or longer. The best histological predictor for posttransplant glomerular filtration rate in the LAT group was the extent of global glomerulosclerosis (P = 0.0001). Based on biopsy criteria, we were able to avoid kidney allocation to 70% of our patients with renal dysfunction. Over the first year posttransplant, SLK and LAT patients had comparable estimated glomerular filtration rates. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis did not demonstrate a difference in patient survival between patients who underwent LAT versus SLK.Renal biopsy can be relatively safe in this population, may help elucidate the etiology of renal failure, may predict post-LAT kidney function, and may be helpful in kidney allocation for liver transplant candidates.

Hospitals with the highest readmission rates for high-cost conditions may be targeted for payment penalties. The primary aim of this study was to determine clinical predictors of 30-day readmission after discharge for patients undergoing orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) at the University of Washington from January 2003 to October 2010. Secondary aims included the determination of predictors of institutional care after OLT and differences in survival between patients requiring 30-day readmission and patients not requiring 30-day readmission. Sixty-five of 766 discharged OLT patients (8.6%) required institutional care on discharge; 318 of the 701 remaining patients (45%) were readmitted within 30 days. The predictors of readmission included hospitalization within the 90 days before OLT [29.6% versus 18.4%, relative risk (RR) = 1.33, P = 0.04], pre-OLT portal vein thrombosis (7.9% versus 4.4%, RR = 1.76, P = 0.01), a creatinine level > 1.9 mg/dL (23.9% versus 11.5%, RR = 2.1, P ≤ 0.01), an albumin level < 2.6 mg/dL (51.9% versus 37.6%, RR = 1.57, P < 0.01), postoperative complications (38.7% versus 30.2%, RR = 1.31, P = 0.04), and a high school education or less (14.5% versus 10%, RR = 1.41, P = 0.04). One year after OLT, decreased survival was found for patients requiring 30-day readmission versus patients not requiring readmission (88.2% versus 95.6%, P < 0.05). In conclusion, this study has identified patients at high risk of readmission who may benefit from medical optimization.

Background Hepatic artery thrombosis (HAT) remains a significant cause of graft failure and mortality after pediatric liver transplantation. Conditions not associated with hepatic failure, such as liver tumors, may be more prone to thrombotic problems after transplant. We hypothesized that liver transplant for hepatic malignancies may be associated with increased rates of HAT in the posttransplant period. Methods We conducted a retrospective review of pediatric patients (age, 0-21 years) who underwent primary liver transplantation at a free-standing children's hospital from 1990 to 2009. We reviewed cause of underlying liver disease, age, sex, weight, occurrence of HAT, use of antiplatelets and anticoagulants perioperatively, as well as reintervention, retransplant, and death. Results A total of 129 children underwent 146 liver transplants, and 15 (12%) patients developed HAT. Nine liver transplants were performed for hepatic malignancy, and 4 (44%) of these patients developed HAT (relative risk, 4.85; 95% confidence interval, 1.9-12.2; P = .0015). All 4 children with hepatic malignancy and HAT required reintervention, including 3 retransplants (75%). One of these patients died. Conclusions Hepatic artery thrombosis occurs approximately 5 times more often and appears to be more morbid in children with hepatic malignancy after transplantation. Prospective evaluation of prophylactic anticoagulation regimens in the setting of hepatic malignancy requiring transplantation is warranted.

There has been a dramatic increase in the utilization of kidneys from donors after cardiac death (DCD). While these organs represent an opportunity to expand the donor pool, the assessment of risk and optimal perioperative management remains unclear. Our primary aim was to identify risk factors for objective outcomes, and secondarily, we sought to determine what impact pulsatile machine perfusion (PMP) had on these outcomes. From 1993 to November 2008, 6057 DCD kidney transplants were reported to the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network database, with complete endpoints for delayed graft function (DGF) and graft survival (GS). Risk factors were identified using a multivariable regression analysis adjusted for recipient factors. Age (50 yr) [OR 1.81, p 30 h) [OR 3.22, p 60 yr and improved long-term graft survival when donor age was >50 yr. Donor warm ischemia time >20 min was also found to correlate with increased DGF. While the incidence of DGF in DCD kidneys is significantly higher, the only factors the transplant surgeon can control are CIT and the use of PMP. The data suggest that the use of PMP in DCD kidneys

BACKGROUND The utilization of living donor grafts resulted in an increased availability of liver for pediatric recipients, and accordingly, this was associated with a significantly decreased waiting time before liver transplantation as well as reduced pre-transplant mortality. We hypothesized that the use of living donors in pediatric LT may lead to improved graft and patient survival, when compared to LT using deceased donors. METHODS Retrospective cohort analysis of pediatric recipients (aged

Controversies exist with respect to the mortality of patients undergoing liver transplantation at the extremes of the body mass index (BMI). For pediatric liver transplantation, weight is usually the only factor considered in survival analysis. A review of the United Network for Organ Sharing database (1987-2007) revealed 9701 pediatric patients (

To expand the donor liver pool, ways are sought to better define the limits of marginally transplantable organs. The Donor Risk Index (DRI) lists 7 donor characteristics, together with cold ischemia time and location of the donor, as risk factors for graft failure. We hypothesized that donor hepatic steatosis is an additional independent risk factor. We analyzed the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients for all adult liver transplants performed from October 1, 2003, through February 6, 2008, with grafts from deceased donors to identify donor characteristics and procurement logistics parameters predictive of decreased graft survival. A proportional hazard model of donor variables, including percent steatosis from higher-risk donors, was created with graft survival as the primary outcome. Of 21,777 transplants, 5051 donors had percent macrovesicular steatosis recorded on donor liver biopsy. Compared to the 16,726 donors with no recorded liver biopsy, the donors with biopsied livers had a higher DRI, were older and more obese, and a higher percentage died from anoxia or stroke than from head trauma. The donors whose livers were biopsied became our study group. Factors most strongly associated with graft failure at 1 year after transplantation with livers from this high-risk donor group were donor age, donor liver macrovesicular steatosis, cold ischemia time, and donation after cardiac death status. In conclusion, in a high-risk donor group, macrovesicular steatosis is an independent risk factor for graft survival, along with other factors of the DRI including donor age, donor race, donation after cardiac death status, and cold ischemia time.

Background We hypothesized that operative variables might predict survival following liver transplantation. Methods We examined perioperative variables from 469 liver transplants carried out at the University of Washington during 2003–2006. Logistic regression determined the variables' contributions to survival at 30, 90 and 365 days. Results Portal vein blood flow (>1 l/min) was significant to patient survival at 30, 90 and 365 days. Complete reperfusion was only a significant predictor of survival at 30 days. This provided model receiver operating characteristic (ROC) area under the curve (AUC) statistics of 0.93 and 0.87 for 30 and 90 days, respectively. At 365 days, hepatic artery blood flow (>250 ml/min) combined with portal vein blood flow was significantly predictive of survival, with an AUC of 0.74. A subset analysis of 110 transplants demonstrated improved 1-year survival with more aggressive vascular revisions. Discussion Portal vein blood flow is a significant predictor of survival after liver transplantation. Initially, the liver's survival is based on portal vein blood flow; however, subsequent biliary problems and patient demise result from both poor portal vein and inadequate hepatic artery blood flow.