Search

ObjectiveEfforts to improve patient safety are challenged by the lack of universally agreed upon terms. The International Classification for Patient Safety (ICPS) was developed by the World Health Organization for this purpose. This study aimed to test the applicability of the ICPS to a surgical population.DesignA web-based safety debriefing was sent to clinicians involved in surgical care of abdominal organ transplant patients. A multidisciplinary team of patient safety experts, surgeons and researchers used the data to develop a system of classification based on the ICPS. Disagreements were reconciled via consensus, and a codebook was developed for future use by researchers.ResultsA total of 320 debriefing responses were used for the initial review and codebook development. In total, the 320 debriefing responses contained 227 patient safety incidents (range: 0-7 per debriefing) and 156 contributing factors/hazards (0-5 per response). The most common severity classification was 'reportable circumstance,' followed by 'near miss.' The most common incident types were 'resources/organizational management,' followed by 'medical device/equipment.' Several aspects of surgical care were encompassed by more than one classification, including operating room scheduling, delays in care, trainee-related incidents, interruptions and handoffs.ConclusionsThis study demonstrates that a framework for patient safety can be applied to facilitate the organization and analysis of surgical safety data. Several unique aspects of surgical care require consideration, and by using a standardized framework for describing concepts, research findings can be compared and disseminated across surgical specialties. The codebook is intended for use as a framework for other specialties and institutions.

Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

The liver transplantation (LT) evaluation and waitlisting process is subject to variations in care that can impede quality. The American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD) Practice Metrics Committee (PMC) developed quality measures and patient-reported experience measures along the continuum of pre-LT care to reduce care variation and guide patient-centered care. Following a systematic literature review, candidate pre-LT measures were grouped into 4 phases of care: referral, evaluation and waitlisting, waitlist management, and organ acceptance. A modified Delphi panel with content expertise in hepatology, transplant surgery, psychiatry, transplant infectious disease, palliative care, and social work selected the final set. Candidate patient-reported experience measures spanned domains of cognitive health, emotional health, social well-being, and understanding the LT process. Of the 71 candidate measures, 41 were selected: 9 for referral; 20 for evaluation and waitlisting; 7 for waitlist management; and 5 for organ acceptance. A total of 14 were related to structure, 17 were process measures, and 10 were outcome measures that focused on elements not typically measured in routine care. Among the patient-reported experience measures, candidates of LT rated items from understanding the LT process domain as the most important. The proposed pre-LT measures provide a framework for quality improvement and care standardization among candidates of LT. Select measures apply to various stakeholders such as referring practitioners in the community and LT centers. Clinically meaningful measures that are distinct from those used for regulatory transplant reporting may facilitate local quality improvement initiatives to improve access and quality of care., (Copyright © 2024 American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases.)

Competing Interests: The authors declare no funding or conflicts of interest.

Background: All patients starting dialysis should be informed of kidney transplant as a renal replacement therapy option. Prior research has shown disparities in provision of this information. In this study, we aimed to identify patient sociodemographic and dialysis facility characteristics associated with not receiving transplant information at the time of dialysis initiation. We additionally sought to determine the association of receiving transplant information with waitlist and transplant outcomes., Methods: We retrospectively analyzed CMS-2728 forms filed from 2007 to 2019. The primary outcome was report of provision of information about transplant on the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Form CMS-2728. For patients not informed at the time of dialysis, we collected the reported reason for not being informed (medically unfit, declined information, unsuitable due to age, psychologically unfit, not assessed, or other). Cox proportional-hazards model estimates were used to study determinants of addition to the waitlist and transplant (secondary outcomes)., Results: Fifteen percent of patients did not receive information about transplant (N = 133,414). Non-informed patients were more likely to be older, female, white, and on Medicare. Patients informed about transplant had a shorter time between end-stage renal disease onset and addition to the waitlist; they also spent a shorter time on the waitlist before receiving a transplant. Patients at chain dialysis facilities were more likely to receive information, but this did not translate into higher waitlist or transplant rates. Patients at independent facilities acquired by chains were more likely to be informed but less likely to be added to the waitlist post acquisition., Conclusions: Disparities continue to persist in providing information about transplant at initiation of dialysis. Patients who are not informed have reduced access to the transplant waitlist and transplant. Maximizing the number of patients informed could increase the number of patients referred to transplant centers, and ultimately transplanted. However, policy actions should account for differences in protocols stemming from facility ownership., Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (© 2024 The Authors.)

Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest and Source Funding: The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose. Funding from the American Surgical Association Foundation, National Institutes of Minority Health and Health Disparities and CareDx

Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Background: Interventions to improve racial equity in access to living donor kidney transplants (LDKT) have focused primarily on patients, ignoring the contributions of clinicians, transplant centers, and health system factors. Obtaining access to LDKT is a complex, multi-step process involving patients, their families, clinicians, and health system functions. An implementation science framework can help elucidate multi-level barriers to achieving racial equity in LDKT and guide the implementation of interventions targeted at all levels., Methods: We adopted the Pragmatic Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model (PRISM), an implementation science framework for racial equity in LDKT. The purpose was to provide a guide for assessment, inform intervention design, and support planning for the implementation of interventions., Results: We applied 4 main PRISM domains to racial equity in LDKT: Organizational Characteristics, Program Components, External Environment, and Patient Characteristics. We specified elements within each domain that consider perspectives of the health system, transplant center, clinical staff, and patients., Conclusion: The applied PRISM framework provides a foundation for the examination of multi-level influences across the entirety of LDKT care. Researchers, quality improvement staff, and clinicians can use the applied PRISM framework to guide the assessment of inequities, support collaborative intervention development, monitor intervention implementation, and inform resource allocation to improve equity in access to LDKT., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest All the authors declare no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Among the causes of inequity in organ transplantation, geography is oft-cited but rarely defined with precision. Traditionally, geographic inequity has been characterized by variation in distance to transplant centers, availability of deceased organ donors, or the consequences of allocation systems that are inherently geographically based. Recent research has begun to explore the use of measures at various geographic levels to better understand how characteristics of a patient's geographic surroundings contribute to a broad range of transplant inequities. Within, we first explore the relationship between geography, inequities, and the social determinants of health. Next, we review methodologic considerations essential to geographic health research, and critically appraise how these techniques have been applied. Finally, we propose how to use geography to improve access to and outcomes of transplantation., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Ross-Driscoll, McElroy and Adler.)

Importance: It is unclear whether center-level factors are associated with racial equity in living donor kidney transplant (LDKT)., Objective: To evaluate center-level factors and racial equity in LDKT during an 11-year time period., Design, Setting, and Participants: A retrospective cohort longitudinal study was completed in February 2023, of US transplant centers with at least 12 annual LDKTs from January 1, 2008, to December 31, 2018, identified in the Health Resources Services Administration database and linked to the US Renal Data System and the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients., Main Outcomes and Measures: Observed and model-based estimated Black-White mean LDKT rate ratios (RRs), where an RR of 1 indicates racial equity and values less than 1 indicate a lower rate of LDKT of Black patients compared with White patients. Estimated yearly best-case center-specific LDKT RRs between Black and White individuals, where modifiable center characteristics were set to values that would facilitate access to LDKT., Results: The final cohorts of patients included 394 625 waitlisted adults, of whom 33.1% were Black and 66.9% were White, and 57 222 adult LDKT recipients, of whom 14.1% were Black and 85.9% were White. Among 89 transplant centers, estimated yearly center-level RRs between Black and White individuals accounting for center and population characteristics ranged from 0.0557 in 2008 to 0.771 in 2018. The yearly median RRs ranged from 0.216 in 2016 to 0.285 in 2010. Model-based estimations for the hypothetical best-case scenario resulted in little change in the minimum RR (from 0.0557 to 0.0549), but a greater positive shift in the maximum RR from 0.771 to 0.895. Relative to the observed 582 LDKT in Black patients and 3837 in White patients, the 2018 hypothetical model estimated an increase of 423 (a 72.7% increase) LDKTs for Black patients and of 1838 (a 47.9% increase) LDKTs for White patients., Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of patients with kidney failure, no substantial improvement occurred over time either in the observed or the covariate-adjusted estimated RRs. Under the best-case hypothetical estimations, modifying centers' participation in the paired exchange and voucher programs and increased access to public insurance may contribute to improved racial equity in LDKT. Additional work is needed to identify center-level and program-specific strategies to improve racial equity in access to LDKT.

Importance: Studies elucidating determinants of residential neighborhood-level health inequities are needed., Objective: To quantify associations of structural racism indicators with neighborhood prevalence of chronic kidney disease (CKD), diabetes, and hypertension., Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used public data (2012-2018) and deidentified electronic health records (2017-2018) to describe the burden of structural racism and the prevalence of CKD, diabetes, and hypertension in 150 residential neighborhoods in Durham County, North Carolina, from US census block groups and quantified their associations using bayesian models accounting for spatial correlations and residents' age. Data were analyzed from January 2021 to May 2023., Exposures: Global (neighborhood percentage of White residents, economic-racial segregation, and area deprivation) and discrete (neighborhood child care centers, bus stops, tree cover, reported violent crime, impervious areas, evictions, election participation, income, poverty, education, unemployment, health insurance coverage, and police shootings) indicators of structural racism., Main Outcomes and Measures: Outcomes of interest were neighborhood prevalence of CKD, diabetes, and hypertension., Results: A total of 150 neighborhoods with a median (IQR) of 1708 (1109-2489) residents; median (IQR) of 2% (0%-6%) Asian residents, 30% (16%-56%) Black residents, 10% (4%-20%) Hispanic or Latino residents, 0% (0%-1%) Indigenous residents, and 44% (18%-70%) White residents; and median (IQR) residential income of $54 531 ($37 729.25-$78 895.25) were included in analyses. In models evaluating global indicators, greater burden of structural racism was associated with greater prevalence of CKD, diabetes, and hypertension (eg, per 1-SD decrease in neighborhood White population percentage: CKD prevalence ratio [PR], 1.27; 95% highest density interval [HDI], 1.18-1.35; diabetes PR, 1.43; 95% HDI, 1.37-1.52; hypertension PR, 1.19; 95% HDI, 1.14-1.25). Similarly in models evaluating discrete indicators, greater burden of structural racism was associated with greater neighborhood prevalence of CKD, diabetes, and hypertension (eg, per 1-SD increase in reported violent crime: CKD PR, 1.15; 95% HDI, 1.07-1.23; diabetes PR, 1.20; 95% HDI, 1.13-1.28; hypertension PR, 1.08; 95% HDI, 1.02-1.14)., Conclusions and Relevance: This cross-sectional study found several global and discrete structural racism indicators associated with increased prevalence of health conditions in residential neighborhoods. Although inferences from this cross-sectional and ecological study warrant caution, they may help guide the development of future community health interventions.

Black individuals are less likely to receive live donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) compared to others. This may be partly related to their concerns about LDKT, which can vary based on age and gender. We conducted a cross-sectional, secondary analysis of the baseline enrollment data from the Talking about Living Kidney Donation Support trial, which studied the effectiveness of social workers and financial interventions on activation towards LDKT among 300 Black individuals from a deceased donor waiting list. We assessed concerns regarding the LDKT process, including their potential need for postoperative social support, future reproductive potential, recipient and donor money matters, recipient and donor safety, and interpersonal concerns. Answers ranged from 0 ("not at all concerned") to 10 ("extremely concerned"). We described and compared participants' concerns both overall and stratified by age (≥45 years old vs <45 years old) and self-reported gender ("male" versus "female"). The participants' top concerns were donor safety (median [IQR] score 10 [5-10]), recipient safety (5 [0-10]), money matters (5 [0-9]), and guilt/indebtedness (5 [0-9]). Younger females had statistically significantly higher odds of being concerned about future reproductive potential (odds ratio [OR] 3.77, 95% CI 2.77, 4.77), and older males had statistically higher mean concern about postoperative social support (OR 1.79, 95% CI 0.19, 3.38). Interventions to improve rates of LDKT among Black individuals should include education and counseling about the safety of LDKT for both recipients and donors, reproductive counseling for female LDKT candidates of childbearing age, and addressing older males' needs for increased social support., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest All the authors declare no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Disparities exist in referral and access to the liver transplant (LT) waitlist, and social determinants of health (SDOH) are increasingly recognized as important factors driving health inequities, including in LT. The SDOH of potential transplant candidates is therefore important to characterize when designing targeted interventions to promote equity in access to LT. Yet, it is uncertain how a transplant center should approach this issue, characterize SDOH, identify disparities, and use these data to inform interventions. We performed a retrospective study of referrals for first-time, single-organ LT to our center from 2016 to 2020. Addresses were geoprocessed and mapped to the corresponding county, census tract, and census block group to assess their geospatial distribution, identify potential disparities in referrals, and characterize their communities across multiple domains of SDOH to identify potential barriers to evaluation and selection. We identified variability in referral patterns and areas with disproportionately low referrals, including counties in the highest quartile of liver disease mortality (9%) and neighborhoods in the highest quintile of socioeconomic deprivation (17%) and quartile of poverty (21%). Black individuals were also under-represented compared with expected state demographics (12% vs. 18%). Among the referral population, several potential barriers to evaluation and selection for LT were identified, including poverty, educational attainment, access to healthy food, and access to technology. This approach to the characterization of a transplant center's referral population by geographic location and associated SDOH demonstrates a model for identifying disparities in a referral population and potential barriers to evaluation that can be used to inform targeted interventions for disparities in LT access., (Copyright © 2023 American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases.)

Standard eligibility criteria for simultaneous liver-kidney transplantation (SLK) are in place in the United States. We hypothesize that the benefit associated with SLK over liver transplant alone differs by patient, depending on the specific SLK criteria met. We analyzed a retrospective US cohort of 5446 adult liver transplant or SLK recipients between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2018, who are potentially qualified for SLK. Exposure was a receipt of SLK. We tested effect modification by the specific SLK eligibility criteria met (end-stage kidney disease, acute kidney injury, chronic kidney disease, or unknown). The primary outcome was death within 1 year of a liver transplant. We used a modified Cox regression analysis containing an interaction term of SLK * time from transplant. Two hundred ten (9%) SLK recipients and 351 (11%) liver-alone recipients died in 1 year. In the overall population, SLK was associated with a mortality benefit over liver transplant on the day of the transplant, without adjustment [HR: 0.59 (95% CI, 0.46-0.76)] and with adjustment [aHR: 0.50 (95% CI, 0.35-0.71)]. However, when SLK eligibility criteria were included, only in patients with end-stage kidney disease was SLK associated with a sustained survival benefit at day 0 [HR: 0.17 (0.08-0.35)] up to 288 (95% CI, 120-649) days post-transplant. Benefit within the first year post-transplant associated with SLK over liver-alone transplantation was only pronounced in patients with end-stage kidney disease but not present in patients meeting other criteria for SLK. A "strict SLK liberal Safety Net" strategy may warrant consideration at the national policy level., (Copyright © 2023 American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases.)

Objective: This study aims to introduce key concepts and methods that inform the design of studies that seek to quantify the causal effect of social determinants of health (SDOH) on access to and outcomes following organ transplant., Background: The causal pathways between SDOH and transplant outcomes are poorly understood. This is partially due to the unstandardized and incomplete capture of the complex interactions between patients, their neighborhood environments, the tertiary care system, and structural factors that impact access and outcomes. Designing studies to quantify the causal impact of these factors on transplant access and outcomes requires an understanding of the fundamental concepts of causal inference., Methods: We present an overview of fundamental concepts in causal inference, including the potential outcomes framework and direct acyclic graphs. We discuss how to conceptualize SDOH in a causal framework and provide applied examples to illustrate how bias is introduced., Results: There is a need for direct measures of SDOH, increased measurement of latent and mediating variables, and multi-level frameworks for research that examine health inequities across multiple health systems to generalize results. We illustrate that biases can arise due to socioeconomic status, race/ethnicity, and incongruencies in language between the patient and clinician., Conclusions: Progress towards an equitable transplant system requires establishing causal pathways between psychosocial risk factors, access, and outcomes. This is predicated on accurate and precise quantification of social risk, best facilitated by improved organization of health system data and multicenter efforts to collect and learn from it in ways relevant to specialties and service lines., Competing Interests: Disclosure: The authors declare that they have nothing to disclose., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

Purpose of Review: As policies governing liver transplantation (LT) continue to change and influence clinical practice, it is important to monitor trends in equitable access and outcomes amongst patients. The purpose of this review is to closely examine recent advances and findings in health equity research in LT over the last 2 years; specifically evaluating inequities at the different stages of LT (referral, evaluation, listing, waitlist outcomes and post-LT outcomes)., Recent Findings: Advancements in geospatial analysis have enabled investigators to identify and begin to study the role of community level factors (such as neighborhood poverty, increased community capital/urbanicity score) in driving LT disparities. There has also been a shift in investigating center specific characteristics that contributes to disparities in waitlist access. Modification to the current model for end stage liver disease (MELD) score policy accounting for height differences is also crucial to eradicating the disparity in LT amongst sexes. Lastly, Black pediatric patients have been shown to have higher rates of death and worse posttransplant outcome after transitioning to adult healthcare., Summary: Although, there have been some advances in methodology and policies, inequities in waitlist access, waitlist outcomes and posttransplant outcomes continue to be pervasive in the field of LT. Future directions include expansion of social determinants of health measures, inclusion of multicenter designs, MELD score modification and investigation into drivers of worse posttransplant outcomes in Black patients., (Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

The choice of deprivation index can influence conclusions drawn regarding the extent of deprivation within a community and the identification of the most deprived communities in the United States. This study aimed to determine the degree of correlation among deprivation indices commonly used to characterize transplant populations. We used a retrospective cohort consisting of adults listed for liver or kidney transplants between 2008 and 2018 to compare 4 deprivation indices: neighborhood deprivation index, social deprivation index (SDI), area deprivation index, and social vulnerability index. Pairwise correlation between deprivation indices by transplant referral regions was measured using Spearman correlations of population-weighted medians and upper quartiles. In total, 52 individual variables were used among the 4 deprivation indices with 25% overlap. For both organs, the correlation between the population-weighted 75th percentile of the deprivation indices by transplant referral region was highest between SDI and social vulnerability index (liver and kidney, 0.93) and lowest between area deprivation index and SDI (liver, 0.19 and kidney, 0.15). The choice of deprivation index affects the applicability of research findings across studies examining the relationship between social risk and clinical outcomes. Appropriate application of these measures to transplant populations requires careful index selection based on the intended use and included variable relevance., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Shortages of liver allografts for children awaiting transplantation have led to high LT waitlist mortality. Prior studies have shown that usage of TVG can reduce waiting time and waitlist mortality, but their use is not universal. We sought to compare patient and graft survival between WLG and TVG and to identify potential associated risk factors in a contemporary pediatric LT cohort., Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of patient survival, graft survival, and biliary and vascular complications for LT recipients <18 years old entered into the Society of Pediatric Liver Transplantation prospective multicenter database., Results: Of 1839 LT recipients, 1029 received a WLG and 810 received a TVG from either a LD or a DD. There was no difference in patient survival or graft survival by graft type. Three-year patient survival and graft survival were 96%, 93%, and 96%, and 95%, 89%, and 92% for TVG-LD, TVG-DD, and WLG, respectively. Biliary complications were more frequent in TVG. Hepatic artery thrombosis was more frequent in WLG. Multivariate analysis revealed primary diagnosis was the only significant predictor of patient survival. Predictors for graft survival included time-dependent development of biliary and vascular complications., Conclusions: There were no significant differences in patient and graft survival based on graft types in this North American multi-center pediatric cohort. Widespread routine use of TVG should be strongly encouraged to decrease mortality on the waitlist for pediatric LT candidates., (© 2022 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background: To evaluate the effect of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) Medicaid expansion on payor mix among patients on the kidney and liver transplant waiting list as well as waiting list and post-transplant outcomes., Design: Using the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients, we performed a secondary data analysis of all patients on the kidney and liver transplant waiting list from 2007 to 2018. We described changes in payor mix by timing of state Medicaid expansion. We used competing risks models to estimate cause-specific hazard ratios for the effects of insurance and era on death/delisting and transplant. We used a Poisson regression model to estimate the effect of insurance and era on incidence rate ratio of inactivations on the waiting list. We used Cox proportional hazards models to estimate the effect of insurance and era on graft and patient survival., Results: A decade after implementation of the ACA, the prevalence of Medicaid beneficiaries listed for transplant increased by 2.5% (from 7.4% to 9.9%) for kidney and by 2.6% (15.3% to 17.9%) for liver. Expansion states had greater increases than nonexpansion states (kidney 3.8% vs 0.6%, liver 5.3% vs -1.8%). Among wait-listed patients, the magnitude of association of Medicaid insurance vs private insurance with transplant decreased over time for kidney candidates (era 1 subdistribution hazard ratio (SHR), 0.62 [95% CI, 0.60-0.64] vs era 3 SHR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.74-0.70]) but increased for liver candidates (era 1 SHR, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.83-0.90] vs era 3 SHR 0.79 [95% CI, 0.77-0.82]). Medicaid-insured kidney and liver recipients had greater hazards of graft failure; this did not change over time (kidney: HR, 1.23 [95% CI, 1.06-1.44] liver: HR, 1.05 [95% CI, 0.94-1.17])., Conclusions: For the millions of patients with chronic kidney and liver diseases, implementation of the ACA has resulted in only modest increases in access to transplant for the publicly insured vs the privately insured., Competing Interests: DISCLOSURE The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this article., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Heart failure affects >6 million people in the United States alone and is most prevalent in Black patients who suffer the highest mortality risk. Yet prior studies have suggested that Black patients are less likely to receive advanced heart failure therapy. We hypothesized that Black patients would have decreased rates of durable left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation within our expansive heart failure program., Methods: A retrospective single-center cohort study was conducted at a single high-volume academic medical center. Patients between 18 and 85 years admitted with a diagnosis of cardiogenic shock or congestive heart failure between 1, 2013 and 12, 2017 with a left ventricular ejection fraction < 30% and inotropic dependence or need for mechanical circulatory support were included. Patients with contraindications to durable LVAD were excluded. An adjusted logistic regression model for durable LVAD implantation within 90 days of the index admission was used to determine the effect of race on durable LVAD implantation., Results: Among the 702 study patients (60.9% White, 34.1% Black), durable LVAD implantation was performed within 90 days of the index admission in 183 (26%) of the cohort. After multivariate analysis, Black patients were not found to have a statistically significant difference in durable LVAD implantation rates compared to White patients in our study (OR: 0.68 [95% confidence interval: 0.45-1.04; p: .074])., Conclusions: Black patients in our study did not have a statistically significant difference in the rate of durable LVAD implantation compared with White patients after adjustments were made for age, sex, socioeconomic, and clinical covariates. Larger prospective studies are needed to validate these findings., (© 2022 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Health equity research in transplantation has largely relied on national data sources, yet the availability of social determinants of health (SDOH) data varies widely among these sources. We sought to characterize the extent to which national data sources contain SDOH data applicable to end-stage organ disease (ESOD) and transplant patients. We reviewed 10 active national data sources based in the United States. For each data source, we examined patient inclusion criteria and explored strengths and limitations regarding SDOH data, using the National Institutes of Health PhenX toolkit of SDOH as a data collection instrument. Of the 28 SDOH variables reviewed, eight-core demographic variables were included in ≥80% of the data sources, and seven variables that described elements of social status ranged between 30 and 60% inclusion. Variables regarding identity, healthcare access, and social need were poorly represented (≤20%) across the data sources, and five of these variables were included in none of the data sources. The results of our review highlight the need for improved SDOH data collection systems in ESOD and transplant patients via: enhanced inter-registry collaboration, incorporation of standardized SDOH variables into existing data sources, and transplant center and consortium-based investigation and innovation., (© 2022 The American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons.)

Importance: System and center-level interventions to improve health equity in organ transplantation benefit from robust characterization of the referral population served by each transplant center. Transplant referral regions (TRRs) define geographic catchment areas for transplant centers in the US, but accurately characterizing the demographics of populations within TRRs using US Census data poses a challenge., Objective: To compare 2 methods of linking US Census data with TRRs-a geospatial intersection method and a zip code cross-reference method., Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study compared spatial congruence of spatial intersection and zip code cross-reference methods of characterizing TRRs at the census block level. Data included adults aged 18 years and older on the waiting list for kidney transplant from 2008 through 2018., Exposures: End-stage kidney disease., Main Outcomes and Measures: Multiple assignments, where a census tract or block group crossed the boundary between 2 hospital referral regions and was assigned to multiple different TRRs; misassigned area, the portion of census tracts or block groups assigned to a TRR using either method but fall outside of the TRR boundary., Results: In total, 102 TRRs were defined for 238 transplant centers. The zip code cross-reference method resulted in 4627 multiple-assigned census block groups (representing 18% of US land area assigned to TRRs), while the spatial intersection method eliminated this problem. Furthermore, the spatial method resulted in a mean and median reduction in misassigned area of 65% and 83% across all TRRs, respectively, compared with the zip code cross-reference method., Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, characterizing populations within TRRs with census block groups provided high spatial resolution, complete coverage of the country, and balanced population counts. A spatial intersection approach avoided errors due to duplicative and incorrect assignments, and allowed more detailed and accurate characterization of the sociodemographics of populations within TRRs; this approach can enrich transplant center knowledge of local referral populations, assist researchers in understanding how social determinants of health may factor into access to transplant, and inform interventions to improve heath equity.

There are no established regulations governing patient selection for simultaneous heart-kidney (SHK) transplantation, creating the potential for significant center-level variations in clinical practice., Methods: Using the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) Standard Transplant Analysis and Research (STAR) file, we examined practice trends and variations in patient selection for SHK at the center level between January 1, 2004 and March 31, 2019., Results: Overall, SHK is becoming more common with most centers performing heart transplants also performing SHK. Among patients who underwent heart transplant who were receiving dialysis, the rate of SHK varied from 22% to 86% at the center level. Among patients not on dialysis, the median estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) of patients receiving SHK varied between 19 and 59 mL/min/1.73 m 2 . When adjusting for other factors, the odds of SHK varied 57-fold between the highest and lowest SHK performing centers., Conclusion: Variation in SHK at the center level suggests the need for national guidelines around the selection of patients for SHK., (© 2022 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Organ transplant is the preferred treatment for end-stage organ disease, yet the majority of patients with end-stage organ disease are never placed on the transplant waiting list. Limited access to the transplant waiting list combined with the scarcity of the organ pool result in over 100,000 deaths annually in the United States. Patients face unique barriers to referral and acceptance for organ transplant based on social determinants of health, and patients from disenfranchised groups suffer from disproportionately lower rates of transplantation. Our objective was to review the literature describing disparities in access to organ transplantation based on social determinants of health to integrate the existing knowledge and guide future research., Methods: We conducted a scoping review of the literature reporting disparities in access to heart, lung, liver, pancreas and kidney transplantation based on social determinants of health (race, income, education, geography, insurance status, health literacy and engagement). Included studies were categorized based on steps along the transplant care continuum: referral for transplant, transplant evaluation and selection, living donor identification/evaluation, and waitlist outcomes., Results: Our search generated 16,643 studies, of which 227 were included in our final review. Of these, 34 focused on disparities in referral for transplantation among patients with chronic organ disease, 82 on transplant selection processes, 50 on living donors, and 61 on waitlist management. In total, 15 studies involved the thoracic organs (heart, lung), 209 involved the abdominal organs (kidney, liver, pancreas), and three involved multiple organs. Racial and ethnic minorities, women, and patients in lower socioeconomic status groups were less likely to be referred, evaluated, and added to the waiting list for organ transplant. The quality of the data describing these disparities across the transplant literature was variable and overwhelmingly focused on kidney transplant., Conclusions: This review contextualizes the quality of the data, identifies seminal work by organ, and reports gaps in the literature where future research on disparities in organ transplantation should focus. Future work should investigate the association of social determinants of health with access to the organ transplant waiting list, with a focus on prospective analyses that assess interventions to improve health equity., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Background: Liver transplantation is definitive therapy for end stage liver disease in pediatric patients. Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) with the left lateral segment (LLS) is often a feasible option. However, the size of LLS is an important factor in donor suitability - particularly when the recipient weighs less than 10 kg. In the present study, we sought to define a formula for estimating left lateral segment volume (LLSV) in potential LLS donors., Methods: We obtained demographic and anthropometric measurements on 50 patients with Computed Tomography (CT) scans to determine whole liver volume (WLV), right liver volume (RLV), and LLSV. We performed univariable and multivariable linear regression with backwards stepwise variable selection (p < 0.10) to determine final models., Results: Our study found that previously reported anthropometric and demographics variables correlated with volume were significantly associated with WLV and RLV. On univariable analysis, no demographic or anthropometric measures were correlated with LLSV. On multivariable analysis, LLSV was poorly predicted by the final model (R2 = 0.10, Coefficient of Variation [CV] = 42.2) relative to WLV (R2 = 0.33, CV = 18.8) and RLV (R2 = 0.41, CV = 15.8)., Conclusion: Potential LLS living donors should not be excluded based on anthropometric data: all potential donors should be evaluated regardless of their size., (Copyright © 2021 International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association Inc. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

The impact of HLA matching on graft survival has been well characterized in renal transplantation, with a higher degree of matching associated with superior graft survival. Additionally, living donor grafts are known to confer superior survival compared to those from deceased donors. The purpose of this study is to report our multi-decade institutional experience and outcomes for patients who received HLA-identical living donor grafts, which represent the most favorable scenario in kidney transplantation. We conducted a retrospective analysis of these graft recipients performed at a Duke University Medical Center between the years of 1965 and 2002. The recipients demonstrated excellent graft and patient survival outcomes, superior to a contemporary cohort, with median patient and graft survival of 24.2 and 30.9 years, respectively, among Duke recipients vs. 16.1 and 16.0 years in a cohort derived from national data. This study offers a broad perspective on the importance of HLA matching and graft type, and demonstrates a historical best-case-scenario in renal transplantation.

Stark racial disparities in access to and receipt of kidney transplantation, especially living donor and pre-emptive transplantation, have persisted despite decades of investigation and intervention. The causes of these disparities are complex, are inter-related, and result from a cascade of structural barriers to transplantation which disproportionately impact minoritized individuals and communities. Structural barriers contributing to racial transplant inequities have been acknowledged but are often not fully explored with regard to transplant equity. We describe longstanding racial disparities in transplantation, and we discuss contributing structural barriers which occur along the transplant pathway including pretransplant health care, evaluation, referral processes, and the evaluation of transplant candidates. We also consider the role of multilevel socio-contextual influences on these processes. We believe focused efforts which apply an equity lens to key transplant processes and systems are required to achieve greater structural competency and, ultimately, racial transplant equity., (Copyright © 2021 National Kidney Foundation, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Livers from "nonideal" but acceptable donors are underutilized; however, organ procurement organization (OPO) metrics do not assess how OPO-specific practices contribute to these trends. In this analysis, we evaluated nonideal liver donor avoidance or risk aversion among OPOs and within US donation service areas (DSAs)., Methods: Adult donors in the United Network for Organ Sharing registry who donated ≥1 organ for transplantation between 2007 and 2019 were included. Nonideal donors were defined by any of the following: age > 70, hepatitis C seropositive, body mass index > 40, donation after circulatory death, or history of malignancy. OPO-specific performance was evaluated based on rates of nonideal donor pursuit and consent attainment. DSA performance (OPO + transplant centers) was evaluated based on rates of nonideal donor pursuit, consent attainment, liver recovery, and transplantation. Lower rates were considered to represent increased donor avoidance or increased risk aversion., Results: Of 97 911 donors, 31 799 (32.5%) were nonideal. Unadjusted OPO-level rates of nonideal donor pursuit ranged from 88% to 100%. In a 5-tier system of overall risk aversion, tier 5 DSAs (least risk-averse) and tier 1 DSAs (most risk-averse) had the highest and lowest respective rates of non-ideal donor pursuit, consent attainment, liver recovery, and transplantation. On average, recovery rates were over 25% higher among tier 5 versus tier 1 DSAs. If tier 1 DSAs had achieved the same average liver recovery rate as tier 5 DSAs, approximately 2100 additional livers could have been recovered during the study period., Conclusion: Most OPOs aggressively pursue nonideal liver donors; however, recovery practices vary widely among DSAs. Fair OPO evaluations should consider early donation process stages to best disentangle OPO and center-level practices., Competing Interests: S.E.H. is supported by the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences of the National Institutes of Health under award number TL1TR002555. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health. The authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Transplantation Direct. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

Historically in the United States, kidneys for simultaneous liver-kidney transplantation (SLKT) candidates were allocated with livers, prioritizing SLKT recipients over much of the kidney waiting list. A 2017 change in policy delineated renal function criteria for SLKT and implemented a safety net for kidney-after-liver transplantation. We compared the use and outcomes of SLKT and kidney-after-liver transplant with the 2017 policy. United Network for Organ Sharing Standard Transplant Analysis and Research files were used to identify adults who received liver transplantations (LT) from August 10, 2007 to August 10, 2012; from August 11, 2012 to August 10, 2017; and from August 11, 2017 to June 12, 2019. LT recipients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) were defined by dialysis requirement or estimated glomerular filtration rate <25. We evaluated outcomes and center-level, regional, and national practice before and after the policy change. Nonparametric cumulative incidence of kidney-after-liver listing and transplant were modeled by era. A total of 6332 patients received SLKTs during the study period; fewer patients with glomerular filtration rate (GFR) ≥50 mL/min underwent SLKT over time (5.8%, 4.8%, 3.0%; P = 0.01 ). There was also less variability in GFR at transplant after policy implementation on center and regional levels. We then evaluated LT-alone (LTA) recipients with ESRD (n = 5408 from 2012-2017; n = 2321 after the policy). Listing for a kidney within a year of LT increased from 2.9% before the policy change to 8.8% after the policy change, and the rate of kidney transplantation within 1 year increased from 0.7% to 4% (P < 0.001). After the policy change, there was no difference in patient survival rates between SLKT and LTA among patients with ESRD. Implementation of the 2017 SLKT policy change resulted in reduced variability in SLKT recipient kidney function and increased access to deceased donor kidney transplantation for LTA recipients with kidney disease without negatively affecting outcomes., (Copyright © 2021 American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases.)

The incidence of simultaneous heart-kidney transplant (SHK) has increased markedly in the last 15 years. There are no universally agreed upon indications for SHK vs. heart alone (HA) transplant, and center evaluation processes vary widely. We utilized Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients data from 2003 to 2017 to quantify changes in the practice of SHK, examine the survival of SHK vs. HA, and identify patients with marginal benefit from SHK. We used Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazards to assess differences in survival. The incidence of SHK increased more than fourfold between 2003 and 2017 from 1.6% to 6.6% of total hearts transplanted, while the proportion of dialysis-dependent patients undergoing SHK has remained constant. SHK was associated with increased survival in dialysis-dependent patients (Median Survival SHK: 12.6 vs. HA: 7.1 years p < .0001) but not with nondialysis-dependent patients (Median Survival SHK: 12.5 vs. HA 12.3, p = .24). The marginal effect of SHK in decreasing the hazard of death diminished with increasing eGFR. Delayed graft function occurred in 26% of SHK recipients. Posttransplant chronic dialysis was similar for both operations (6.4% of HA and 6.0% of SHK). Further study is needed to define patients who benefit from SHK., (© 2020 The American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons.)

Despite extraordinary achievements in over the past 20 years, the field of transplantation remains hindered by relatively narrow metrics for success. Eudaimonia is an Aristotelian concept that refers to flourishing, or achieving the best conditions possible, in every sense. The vast amounts of patient data that are collected throughout the transplant care continuum, ranging from social determinants of health to genomic profiles and patient-reported outcomes, afford us unprecedented opportunity to enhance our definition of success for our transplant patients. We must engage the technologies available for data integration and analysis and apply them in an insightful way, such that our clinical practice evolves beyond patient and graft survival and toward a more comprehensive state of wellness., (© 2021 The American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons.)

Background: "Textbook outcome" (TO) is a novel composite quality measure that encompasses multiple postoperative endpoints, representing the ideal "textbook" hospitalization for complex surgical procedures. We defined TO for kidney transplantation using a cohort from a high-volume institution., Methods: Adult patients who underwent isolated kidney transplantation at our institution between 2016 and 2019 were included. TO was defined by clinician consensus at our institution to include freedom from intraoperative complication, postoperative reintervention, 30-day intensive care unit or hospital readmission, length of stay > 75th percentile of kidney transplant patients, 90-day mortality, 30-day acute rejection, delayed graft function, and discharge with a Foley catheter. Recipient, operative, financial characteristics, and post-transplant patient, graft, and rejection-free survival were compared between patients who achieved and failed to achieve TO., Results: A total of 557 kidney transplant patients were included. Of those, 245 (44%) achieved TO. The most common reasons for TO failure were delayed graft function (N = 157, 50%) and hospital readmission within 30 days (N = 155, 50%); the least common was mortality within 90 days (N = 6, 2%). Patient, graft, and rejection-free survival were significantly improved among patients who achieved TO. On average, patients who achieved TO incurred approximately $50,000 less in total inpatient charges compared to those who failed TO., Conclusions: TO in kidney transplantation was associated with favorable post-transplant outcomes and significant cost-savings. TO may offer transplant centers a detailed performance breakdown to identify aspects of perioperative care in need of process improvement.

Background: Although discussions with family or friends can improve access to living-donor kidney transplantation (LDKT), they remain an understudied step in the LDKT process., Methods: Among 300 African American transplant candidates, we examined how sociodemographic, clinical, LDKT-related, and psychosocial characteristics related to the occurrence of LDKT discussions with family or friends. We also analyzed the relation between discussion occurrence and donor activation on transplant candidates' behalves (at least one donor inquiry or completed donor evaluation in the medical record). We assessed associations of discussion characteristics (context, content, and perceptions) with donor activation among discussants, and we identified discussion barriers among non-discussants., Results: Most candidates (90%) had discussed LDKT. Only family functioning was statistically significantly associated with discussion occurrence. Specifically, family dysfunction was associated with 62% lower odds of discussion than family function. Family functioning, discussion occurrence, and different discussion characteristics were statistically significantly related to donor activation. The most prevalent discussion barrier was never having thought about discussing LDKT., Conclusions: Family functioning affected the likelihood of discussing LDKT, and family functioning, discussion occurrence, and discussion characteristics were associated with donor activation. Advancing understanding of how family functioning and LDKT discussions affect progression to LDKT may benefit interventions to increase LDKT., (© 2021 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Liver grafts from pediatric donors represent a small fraction of grafts transplanted into adult recipients, and their use in adults requires special consideration of donor size to prevent perioperative complications. In the past, graft weight or volume ratios have been adopted from the living donor liver transplant literature to guide clinicians; however, these metrics are not regularly available to surgeons accepting deceased donor organs. In this study, we evaluated all pediatric-to-adult liver transplants in the United Network for Organ Sharing Standard Transplant Analysis and Research database from 1987 to 2019, stratified by donor age and donor-recipient height mismatch ratio (HMR; defined as donor height/recipient height). On multivariable regression controlling for cold ischemia time, age, and transplantation era, the use of donors from ages 0 to 4 and 5 to 9 had increased risk of graft failure (hazard ratio [HR], 1.81 [P < 0.01] and HR, 1.16 [P < 0.01], respectively) compared with donors aged 15 to 17. On Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, a HMR < 0.8 was associated with inferior graft survival (mean, 11.8 versus 14.6 years; log-rank P < 0.001) and inferior patient survival (mean, 13.5 versus 14.9 years; log-rank P < 0.01) when compared with pairs with similar height (HMR, 0.95-1.05; ie, donors within 5% of recipient height). This study demonstrates that both young donor age and low HMR confer additional risk in adult recipients of pediatric liver grafts., (Copyright © 2020 by the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases.)

Background: Outcomes after kidney transplantation (KTx) remain limited by delayed graft function (DGF) and acute rejection. Non-invasive biomarkers may help identify patients at increased risk for these events. We examined the association between the systemic immune-inflammation index (SII), a novel inflammatory biomarker, and outcomes after KTx and evaluated its ability to predict post-transplant prognosis., Patients and Methods: Adult patients who underwent primary KTx at our institution between 2016-2019 were included. SII was calculated from pre-transplant complete blood counts as the ratio of the neutrophil count to the lymphocyte count multiplied by the platelet count. The cutoff between high and low SII was determined by maximizing the area under the curve. Multivariable logistic and Cox regression were used to identify factors associated with DGF and patient, rejection-free, and graft survival respectively., Results: Overall, 378 KTx recipients were included; 224 (59.3%) had high SII. On unadjusted analysis, high SII was associated with reduced odds of DGF, and improved patient and rejection-free survival. After adjustment, high SII was independently associated with improved patient survival alone. Multivariable models incorporating SII performed well for the prediction of DGF (c-statistic=0.755) and patient survival (c-statistic=0.786), though rejection-free survival was more difficult to predict (c-statistic=0.635)., Conclusion: SII demonstrated limited utility as an independent predictor of outcomes after KTx. However, in combination with other clinically relevant parameters, SII is a useful predictor of post-KTx prognosis. Validation of this novel inflammatory biomarker in a multi-institutional study is needed to further elucidate its practical applications in transplantation., (Copyright© 2020, International Institute of Anticancer Research (Dr. George J. Delinasios), All rights reserved.)

Background: The Kidney Allocation System (KAS) was developed to improve equity and utility in organ allocation. We examine the effect of this change on kidney graft distribution and survival., Methods: UNOS data was used to identify first-time adult recipients of a deceased donor kidney-alone transplant pre-KAS (Jan 2012-Dec 2014, n = 26,612) and post-KAS (Jan 2015-Dec 2017, n = 30,701), as well as grafts recovered Jan 2012-Jun 2019., Results: Post-KAS, kidneys were more likely to experience cold ischemia time >24 h (20.0% vs. 18.8%, p < 0.001) and experienced more delayed graft function, though competing risks modeling demonstrated a lower hazard of graft loss post-KAS, HR 0.90 (95% CI 0.84-0.97, p = 0.007). Post-policy, KDPI >85% kidneys were more likely to be shared regionally (37% vs. 14%), and more likely to be discarded (60.6% vs. 54.9%) after the policy change. KDPI >85% graft and patient survival did not change., Conclusions: Implementation of the KAS has increased sharing of high-KDPI kidneys and has decreased the hazard of graft loss without an impact on patient survival., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Textbook outcome (TO) is an emerging concept within multiple surgical domains, which represents a novel effort to define a standardized, composite quality benchmark based on multiple postoperative endpoints that represent the ideal "textbook" hospitalization. We sought to define TO for liver transplantation (LT) using a cohort from a high procedural volume center., Methods: Patients who underwent LT at our institution between 2014 and 2017 were eligible for the study. The definition of TO was determined by clinician consensus at our institution to include freedom from: mortality within 90 days, primary allograft non-function, early allograft dysfunction (EAD), rejection within 30 days, readmission with 30 days, readmission to the ICU during index hospitalization, hospital length of stay > 75th percentile of all liver transplant patients, red blood cell (RBC) transfusion requirement greater than the 75th percentile for all liver transplant patients, Clavien-Dindo Grade III complication (re-intervention), and major intraoperative complication., Results: Two hundred and thirty-one liver transplants with complete data were performed within the study period. Of those, 71 (31%) achieved a TO. Overall, the most likely event to lead to failure to achieve TO was readmission within 30 days (n = 57, 37%) or reoperation (n = 49, 32%). Overall and rejection-free survival did not differ significantly between the 2 groups. Interestingly, patients who achieved TO incurred approximately $60,000 less in total charges than those who did not. When we limit this to charges specifically attributable to the transplant episode, the difference was approximately $50,000 and remained significantly less for those that achieved TO., Conclusions: Here, we present the first definition of TO in LT. Though not associated with long-term outcomes, TO in LT is associated with a significantly lower charges and costs of the initial hospitalization. A multi-institutional study to validate this definition of TO is warranted.

Objective: We sought to compare kidney transplantation outcomes between Veterans Affairs (VA) and non-VA transplant centers., Summary Background Data: Transplant care at the VA has previously been scrutinized due to geographic and systematic barriers. The recently instituted MISSION Act entered effect June 6th, 2019, which enables veteran access to surgical care at civilian hospitals if certain eligibility criteria are met., Methods: We evaluated observed-to-expected outcome ratios (O:E) for graft loss and mortality using the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients database for all kidney transplants during a 15-year period (July 1, 2001-June 30, 2016). Of 229,188 kidney transplants performed during the study period, 1508 were performed at VA centers (N = 7), 7750 at the respective academic institutions affiliated with these VA centers, and 227,680 at non-VA centers nationwide (N = 286)., Results: Aggregate O:E ratios for mortality were lower in VA centers compared with non-VA centers at 1 month and 1 year (O:E = 0.27 vs 1.00, P = 0.03 and O:E = 0.62 vs 1.00, P = 0.03, respectively). Graft loss at 1 month and 1 year was similar between groups (O:E = 0.65 vs 1.00, P = 0.11 and O:E = 0.79 vs 1.00, P = 0.15, respectively). Ratios for mortality and graft loss were similar between VA centers and their respective academic affiliates. Additionally, a subgroup analysis for graft loss and mortality at 3 years (study period January 1, 2009-December 31, 2013) demonstrated no significant differences between VA centers, VA-affiliates, and all non-VA centers., Conclusions: Despite low clinical volume, VA centers offer excellent outcomes in kidney transplantation. Veteran referral to civilian hospitals should weigh the benefit of geographic convenience and patient preference with center outcomes., Competing Interests: The authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2020 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)