Determinants of Long Waiting Time to Kidney Transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Disparity in waiting time to kidney transplantation led to new policy (KAS250). Our aims were to identify variables associated with long wait time (LWT); assess the impact of KAS250 on WT; and analyze modifiable transplant center behaviors correlated with WT. METHODS: SRTR data for adult deceased donor kidney transplants were analyzed. Time-periods from 8/1/2018-7/31/2019 and 5/1/2021-4/30/2022 were chosen for pre- and post-KAS250 analyses. Transplant centers were categorized as LWT or SWT centers depending on whether pre-KAS250 median center waiting times were greater or less than the national pre-KAS250 median waiting time of 57.8 months. RESULTS: In multivariate analysis, transplantation with HCV NAT negative kidneys was associated with an additional 21.3 months of WT (CI: 18.5-24.2, P < .0001), and transplantation with KDPI <85% kidneys was associated with an additional 10.8 months (CI: 8.2-13.3, P < .0001). Post-KAS250 national kidney transplant waiting time decreased from 61-58 months (P < .0001) and waiting time at LWT centers decreased from 74-69 months (P < .0001). Cold ischemic times (CIT) increased (20.2 hours vs 18.3 hours, P < .0001) and DGF rates also increased (32.7% vs 31.0%, P < .0001). Centers generally displayed more aggressive transplantation practices post-KAS250 however significant differences in DCD utilization, organ offer acceptance ratios and tolerance for long CIT persist between SWT and LWT centers. CONCLUSION: KAS250 has reduced waiting time disparities between SWT and LWT centers at the cost of increased CIT and DGF and reduced allocation efficiency. Significant differences in transplant practice persist between SWT and LWT centers.

US Liver Transplant Outcomes After Normothermic Regional Perfusion vs Standard Super Rapid Recovery.

Importance: Normothermic regional perfusion (NRP) is an emerging recovery modality for transplantable allografts from controlled donation after circulatory death (cDCD) donors. In the US, only 11.4% of liver recipients who are transplanted from a deceased donor receive a cDCD liver. NRP has the potential to safely expand the US donor pool with improved transplant outcomes as compared with standard super rapid recovery (SRR). Objective: To assess outcomes of US liver transplants using controlled donation after circulatory death livers recovered with normothermic regional perfusion vs standard super rapid recovery. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a retrospective, observational cohort study comparing liver transplant outcomes from cDCD donors recovered by NRP vs SRR. Outcomes of cDCD liver transplant from January 2017 to May 2023 were collated from 17 US transplant centers and included livers recovered by SRR and NRP (thoracoabdominal NRP [TA-NRP] and abdominal NRP [A-NRP]). Seven transplant centers used NRP, allowing for liver allografts to be transplanted at 17 centers; 10 centers imported livers recovered via NRP from other centers. Exposures: cDCD livers were recovered by either NRP or SRR. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was ischemic cholangiopathy (IC). Secondary end points included primary nonfunction (PNF), early allograft dysfunction (EAD), biliary anastomotic strictures, posttransplant length of stay (LOS), and patient and graft survival. Results: A total of 242 cDCD livers were included in this study: 136 recovered by SRR and 106 recovered by NRP (TA-NRP, 79 and A-NRP, 27). Median (IQR) NRP and SRR donor age was 30.5 (22-44) years and 36 (27-49) years, respectively. Median (IQR) posttransplant LOS was significantly shorter in the NRP cohort (7 [5-11] days vs 10 [7-16] days; P < .001). PNF occurred only in the SRR allografts group (n = 2). EAD was more common in the SRR cohort (123 of 136 [56.1%] vs 77 of 106 [36.4%]; P = .007). Biliary anastomotic strictures were increased 2.8-fold in SRR recipients (7 of 105 [6.7%] vs 30 of 134 [22.4%]; P = .001). Only SRR recipients had IC (0 vs 12 of 133 [9.0%]; P = .002); IC-free survival by Kaplan-Meier was significantly improved in NRP recipients. Patient and graft survival were comparable between cohorts. Conclusion and Relevance: There was comparable patient and graft survival in liver transplant recipients of cDCD donors recovered by NRP vs SRR, with reduced rates of IC, biliary complications, and EAD in NRP recipients. The feasibility of A-NRP and TA-NRP implementation across multiple US transplant centers supports increasing adoption of NRP to improve organ use, access to transplant, and risk of wait-list mortality.

Outcomes After Deceased Donor Kidney Transplantation Using Kidney Allografts With Marginal Perfusion Parameters.

BACKGROUND: This study examines outcomes of deceased donor kidney transplantation (DDKT) in recipients of kidney allografts with marginal perfusion parameters. METHODS: Allografts with marginal perfusion parameters (resistance index [RI] >0.4 and pump flow rate [F] <70 mL/min; MP group) were compared with those with good parameters (RI <0.4 and F >70 mL/min; GP group) for DDKT recipients between January 1996 and November 2017 after hypothermic pulsatile perfusion. Demographics, creatinine, cold ischemia times (CIT), delayed graft function (DGF), and recipient glomerular filtration rate at pre- and post-transplant were noted. The primary outcome was graft survival post-transplant. RESULTS: In the MP (n = 31) versus GP (n = 1281) group, the median recipient was aged 57 years versus 51 years; the median donor was aged 47 versus 37 years; terminal creatinine was 0.9 versus 0.9 mg/dL; CIT was 10.2 versus 13 hours, and the RI and flow were 0.46 and 60 mL/min versus 0.21 and 120 mL/min. The DGF rate was 19% (MP) versus 8% (GP). The graft survival in the MP versus GP group was 81% versus 90% (1 year), 65% versus 79% (3 years), 65% versus 73% (4 years), and 45% versus 68% (5 years). CONCLUSION: Carefully selected kidney allografts after comprehensive donor and recipient evaluation may allow for the use of these routinely discarded kidneys with marginal perfusion parameters.

Postoperative and Recurrent Hematuria after Pretransplant Core Needle Biopsy in Living Donor Kidney Transplant.

Background: Core needle and wedge biopsies are the two main pathologic ways to determine the suitability of a kidney allograft and to have a baseline allograft biopsy in case of future rejection. Case Presentation. A 57-year-old patient developed a renal arteriovenous fistula causing postoperative and recurrent hematuria after allograft pretransplant renal core needle biopsy and treated with selective Interventional radiology coil embolization. Conclusion: Delayed profound hematuria can be seen after pretransplant core needle renal biopsies and can recur again even after complete resolution, due to arteriovenous fistula formation in the renal calyceal system.

Orthotopic Kidney Transplant as a Fifth Intra-Abdominal Organ after Two Previous Kidney and Two Previous Pancreas Transplants.

Background: Patients with more than two prior kidney transplant procedures pose unique surgical challenges. Once both the right and left retroperitoneal spaces have been dissected, intra-abdominal implantation is usually necessary. If the external iliac arteries have been used previously, it is sometimes necessary to use the aorta and vena cava for implantation. Gaining safe exposure in these cases can be complicated by history of prior laparotomy, adhesive disease, and other surgical histories. Case Presentation. A 58-year-old female with type 1 diabetes and end-stage renal disease presented for surgical evaluation for kidney transplant. Surgical history was notable for prior simultaneous kidney-pancreas transplant followed by both a living donor kidney transplant and a pancreas after kidney transplant. She had undergone both an allograft nephrectomy and an allograft pancreatectomy and currently had a nonfunctioning kidney in the left retroperitoneal position and a nonfunctioning pancreatic allograft on the right common iliac artery. The entire distal aortoiliac system was surgically inaccessible. She was listed for transplantation, and a cadaveric graft was allocated. Intraoperatively, severe lower abdominal and pelvic adhesions prevented any use of the iliac system. A left native nephrectomy was performed, and the allograft was implanted in the left orthotopic position. The native left renal vein was used for outflow, the donor renal artery was joined end-to-side to the infrarenal aorta, and a uretero-ureterostomy was created. The operation was uneventful. The allograft functioned without delay, and almost one year later, the GFR is approximately 50 mg/dL. Conclusion: The left orthotopic position can be a good choice for kidney transplant candidates with histories of prior complex lower abdominal surgery.

Safely Expanding the Liver Donor Pool by Utilization of Organs from Donation after Circulatory Death with Comparable Results to Donation After Brain Death, a Large Single-Center Experience.

BACKGROUND: Use of livers donated after circulatory death (DCD) is one way to expand the donor pool. Our center has aggressively incorporated use of DCD liver grafts into practice. We examined our center and national outcomes as well as national DCD liver utilization. METHODS: Liver transplants performed at our center and nationally from 11/2016 through 9/2020 were compared. Primary outcomes were patient and graft survival, and national DCD liver utilization. RESULTS: For our center, DCD and donation after brain death (DBD) donors were similar except DCD donors were younger (37 vs 40 years; p < 0.05). Recipient Na-MELD (20 vs 24; p < 0.0001) and cold ischemia time (4.63 vs 5.18 h; p < 0.05) were lower in DCD recipients. There were no significant differences in 1-year patient and graft survival between DCD and DBD liver recipients locally. Nationally, there was a difference in 1-year graft survival year (89.4% vs 92.4%, p < 0.0001) but patient survival was similar between groups. The proportion of DCD livers recovered and transplanted widely varied among organ procurement organizations (OPOs) and transplant centers. CONCLUSIONS: Similar outcomes for DCD and DBD liver recipients should encourage centers and OPOs nationwide to expand utilization of DCD livers.

Early United States experience with liver donation after circulatory determination of death using thoraco-abdominal normothermic regional perfusion: A multi-institutional observational study.

Mortality on the liver waitlist remains unacceptably high. Donation after circulatory determination of death (DCD) donors are considered marginal but are a potentially underutilized resource. Thoraco-abdominal normothermic perfusion (TA-NRP) in DCD donors might result in higher quality livers and offset waitlist mortality. We retrospectively reviewed outcomes of the first 13 livers transplanted from TA-NRP donors in the US. Nine centers transplanted livers from eight organ procurement organizations. Median donor age was 25 years; median agonal phase was 13 minutes. Median recipient age was 60 years; median lab MELD score was 21. Three patients (23%) met early allograft dysfunction (EAD) criteria. Three received simultaneous liver-kidney transplants; neither had EAD nor delayed renal allograft function. One recipient died 186 days post-transplant from sepsis but had normal presepsis liver function. One patient developed a biliary anastomotic stricture, managed endoscopically; no recipient developed clinical evidence of ischemic cholangiopathy (IC). Twelve of 13 (92%) patients are alive with good liver function at 439 days median follow-up; one patient has extrahepatic recurrent HCC. TA-NRP DCD livers in these recipients all functioned well, particularly with respect to IC, and provide a valuable option to decrease deaths on the waiting list.

Liver Transplant for Management of Hepatic Complications of Dyskeratosis Congenita: A Case Report.

Dyskeratosis congenita, a rare genetic disorder typified by progressive bone marrow failure, is classically characterized by the triad of abnormal skin pigmentation, nail dystrophy, and oral leukoplakia; however, it is a multisystem disease. Although hepatic involvement occurs in about 7% of patients with dyskeratosis congenita, end-stage liver disease is rare. Treatment of dyskeratosis congenita generally involves hematopoietic stem cell transplant. For patients with hepatic failure, liver transplant can be an option. Here, we describe a case of a patient with dyskeratosis congenita who presented with liver failure and pulmonary failure, precluding him from hematopoietic stem cell transplant. After liver transplant, the patient had significant improvements in pulmonary function and transfusion requirements, allowing the patient to qualify for hematopoietic stem cell transplant. Although hematopoietic stem cell transplant is typically the first step in the management of dyskeratosis congenita, for patients with severe hepatic manifestations of the disease, a liver transplant first approach may result in better disease management.

Rescue Hepatectomy and Anhepatic Phase Management After Primary Nonfunction in a Liver Transplant.

Primary nonfunction is a rare but lethal complication that occurs in a small number of liver transplants. When primary nonfunction occurs, the only definite treatment is retransplant; however, another liver might not be readily available at that time. Hence, a surgeon should be aware of the various options available at hand for patient care during the time interval between the primary nonfunction and retransplant. Here, we describe the management strategy that was devised to take care of an unstable anhepatic patient in the intensive care unit, care of the patient during anhepatic phase, and successful outcome with a second liver transplant. Our index patient was a recipient of a liver donated after cardiac death. While in the operating room, after reperfusion of the liver, the patient had right heart dysfunction leading to hemodynamic instability and congestion of the liver, which culminated in primary nonfunction. Graft hepatectomy had to be done on postoperative day 1 because of deteriorating condition of the patient, and the patient was maintained in anhepatic phase in the intensive care unit for 27 hours.

Hepatic Resection and Transplant in Glycogen Storage Diseases.

Patients with glycogen storage diseases pose unique management challenges to clinicians.These challenges are exacerbated wheneverthey undergo surgery as the basic anomaly in their glycogen storage pathways make them susceptible to organic acidosis, which may in turn complicate their preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative course. Because of the rarity of these diseases, clinicians may not be aware of the specific management concerns. In the case reported here, a 37-year-old patient with glycogen storage disease type 1 underwentleft hepatectomy for hepatic adenomatosis, which was complicated by intraoperative severe lactic acidosis that was successfully treated. After successful hepatectomy, the patient underwent liver transplant without major lactic acidosis or hemodynamic instability. Early recognition and aggressive management of blood sugar and lactic acidosis in patients with glycogen storage diseases can allow for successful outcomes even when complex surgical procedures are required.

Donation After Circulatory Death Yields Survival Rates Similar to Donation After Brain Death Liver Transplant, Which Effectively Expands the Donor Pool.

OBJECTIVES: Liver allograft shortage has necessitated greater use of donations after circulatory death. Limited data are available to compare recipients' health care utilization for donation after circulatory death versus brain death. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Liver transplant data for our center from November 2016 until May 2019 were obtained (208 donations after brain death and 39 after circulatory death). We excluded patients <18 years old and multiorgan transplants; for cost data only, we also excluded retransplants. Primary outcome was recipients' health care utilization in donation after circulatory death versus brain death and included index admission length of stay, readmissions, and charges from transplant to 6 months. Secondary outcomes were patient and graft survival. RESULTS: Donors from circulatory death were younger than donors from brain death (median age 32 vs 40 years; P < .01). Recipient body mass index (31.23 vs 29.38 kg/m2), Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score (17 vs 19), portal vein thrombosis (15.8% vs 18.0%), length of stay (7 vs 8 days), and 30-, 90-, and 180-day posttransplant index admissions were not significantly different. Charges for index admission were equivalent for donation after circulatory death ($370771) and brain death ($374272) (P = .01). Charges for readmissions at 30 and 180 days were not significantly different (P = .80 and P = .19, respectively). Rates for graft failure (10.3% vs 4.8%; P = .08) and recipient death (10.3% vs 3.8%; P = .17) at 6 months posttransplant were similar. CONCLUSIONS: Donation after circulatory death versus brain death liver transplant recipients had similar lengths of stay and equivalent index admission charges. Graft and patient survival and charges from transplant to 6 months were similar. Donation after circulatory death liver allografts provide a safe, costequivalent donor pool expansion after careful donorrecipient selection.

Left Renal Vein Ligation for Spontaneous Splenorenal Shunts During Deceased-Donor Orthotopic Liver Transplant Is Safe and Can Mitigate Complications from Portal Steal: A Case Series.

OBJECTIVES: Large spontaneous splenorenal shunts can result in portal vein steal syndrome and is a risk factor for portal vein thrombosis after orthotopic liver transplant. Disconnection of these shunts by left renal vein ligation has been suggested as a potential technique for improving portal venous flow and mitigating risk of portal vein thrombus, thus improving graft perfusion. We present a series of 6 patients who underwent left renal vein ligation for spontaneous splenorenal shunts and their outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective analysis included all orthotopic liver transplant recipients who underwent left renal vein ligation for spontaneous splenorenal shunts between 2016 and 2017. Portal venous flow, patency, and renal function were assessed postoperatively. Liver Doppler ultrasonography scans were obtained 1, 3, and 5 days postligation, and serum creatinine was evaluated at 1 and 2 weeks and 1, 3, 6, and 12 months postligation. RESULTS: Over the 1-year study period, 92 orthotopic liver transplants were performed. In 6 patients who underwent left renal vein ligation, spontaneous splenorenal shunts were identified preoperatively. One patient received a retransplant complicated by portal vein thrombus and underwent thrombectomy with left renal vein ligation. Concurrent left renal vein ligation and liver transplant were performed in 5 patients, 2 with known portal vein thrombus at the time of transplant requiring thrombectomy. All patients had subjective intraoperative improvements in portal venous flow after ligation. Zero patients developed postoperative portal vein thrombus. No patients developed clinically significant renal dysfunction at 1-year follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Left renal vein ligation is technically feasible, has minimal and transient effects on renal function, and can improve portal venous flow, thus mitigating the risk for portal vein thrombus, graft hypoperfusion, and possible dysfunction.