The suggestion of mitigating disparity in the liver transplantation field among ABO blood type.

Medical literature highlights differences in liver transplantation (LT) waitlist experiences among ABO blood types. Type AB candidates reportedly have higher LT rates and reduced mortality. Despite liver offering guidelines, ABO disparities persist. This study examines LT access discrepancies among blood types, focusing on type AB, and seeks equitable strategies. Using the United Network for Organ Sharing database (2003-2022), 170 276 waitlist candidates were retrospectively analyzed. Dual predictive analyses (LT opportunity and survival studies) evaluated 1-year recipient pool survival, considering waitlist and post-LT survival, alongside anticipated allocation value per recipient, under 6 scenarios. Of the cohort, 97 670 patients (57.2%) underwent LT. Type AB recipients had the highest LT rate (73.7% vs 55.2% for O), shortest median waiting time (90 vs 198 days for A), and lowest waitlist mortality (12.9% vs 23.9% for O), with the lowest median model for end-stage liver disease-sodium (MELD-Na) score (20 vs 25 for A/O). The LT opportunity study revealed that reallocating type A (or A and O) donors originally for AB recipients to A recipients yielded the greatest reduction in disparities in anticipated value per recipient, from 0.19 (before modification) to 0.08. Meanwhile, the survival study showed that ABO-identical LTs reduced disparity the most (3.5% to 2.8%). Sensitivity analysis confirmed these findings were specific to the MELD-Na score < 30 population, indicating current LT allocation may favor certain blood types. Prioritizing ABO-identical LTs for MELD-Na score < 30 recipients could ensure uniform survival outcomes and mitigate disparities.

Influence of cardiac diagnosis on outcomes of pediatric heart-lung transplantation.

OBJECTIVE: Pediatric Heart-lung transplant (HLTX) is performed for endstage congenital heart disease (CHD) with irreversible pulmonary hypertension or non-congenital heart disease (NCHD) with end-stage heart and lung disease. CHD could influence the outcomes of HTLX due to increased complexity of the operation as compared to NCHD. In this study we evaluated the influence of cardiac diagnosis on outcomes of pediatric HTLX. METHODS: The UNOS database (1987-2022) was queried for primary HTLX in patients <18 years. The data were extracted for demographics, pretransplant characteristics, post-transplant outcomes, and analyzed for the impact of cardiac diagnosis on post-transplant outcomes. Standard statistical tests were used. Survival was compared using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: Ninety of the 213 patients who underwent HLTX had CHD. There were no demographic differences. Heart listing status was similar but with a higher LAS score for NCHD. NCHD had higher pre-operative life support use (mechanical ventilation, inotropes or dialysis) but the use of ECMO as a bridge to transplantation was similar. Wait-list times were longer for CHD. The ischemic times were similar. Post-transplant dialysis, stroke, prolonged mechanical ventilation, and rejection were similar. Survival at 30-days, 1-year, and long-term survival at 17 years was similar. Non-survivors at 30-days post-transplant were on life support, used ECMO as a bridge, had lower wait-list times, longer ischemic times and had strokes. Non-survivors at 1-year had similar factors in addition to a higher dialysis use. CONCLUSION: Cardiac diagnosis had no impact on outcomes after Pediatric HLTX. Patients on life support or ECMO before transplantation were transplanted faster but with lower survival.

The Spread Pattern of New Practice in Liver Transplantation in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Introducing new liver transplantation (LT) practices, like unconventional donor use, incurs higher costs, making evaluation of their prognostic justification crucial. This study reexamines the spread pattern of new LT practices and its prognosis across the United States. METHODS: The study investigated the spread pattern of new practices using the UNOS database (2014-2023). Practices included LT for hepatitis B/C (HBV/HCV) nonviremic recipients with viremic donors, LT for COVID-19-positive recipients, and LT using onsite machine perfusion (OMP). One year post-LT patient and graft survival were also evaluated. RESULTS: LTs using HBV/HCV donors were common in the East, while LTs for COVID-19 recipients and those using OMP started predominantly in California, Arizona, Texas, and the Northeast. K-means cluster analysis identified three adoption groups: facilities with rapid, slow, and minimal adoption rates. Rapid adoption occurred mainly in high-volume centers, followed by a gradual increase in middle-volume centers, with little increase in low-volume centers. The current spread patterns did not significantly affect patient survival. Specifically, for LTs with HCV donors or COVID-19 recipients, patient and graft survivals in the rapid-increasing group was comparable to others. In LTs involving OMP, the rapid- or slow-increasing groups tended to have better patient survival (p = 0.05) and significantly improved graft survival rates (p = 0.02). Facilities adopting new practices often overlap across different practices. DISCUSSION: Our analysis revealed three distinct adoption groups across all practices, correlating the adoption aggressiveness with LT volume in centers. Aggressive adoption of new practices did not compromise patient and graft survivals, supporting the current strategy. Understanding historical trends could predict the rise in future LT cases with new practices, aiding in resource distribution.

Impact of race-neutral eGFR calculations on African American kidney transplant candidate wait time: A single center retrospective analysis.

Race-inclusive estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) could contribute to racial disparity in access to kidney transplantation. The Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) issued a policy allowing waiting time modification for candidates affected by race-inclusive eGFR calculations. Implementation of the new OPTN policy at the kidney transplant program of the Mount Sinai Hospital involved review of 921 African American candidates, of whom 240 (26%) candidates gained a median of 1 year and 10 months. The duration of time candidates gained varied from a minimum of 5 days to a maximum of 12 years and 3 months; 45.4% gained at least 2 years, and 12% gained at least 4 years of wait time. Among those who gained wait time, 20 (8.3%) candidates received deceased donor kidney transplants. Candidates who gained wait time had similar sociodemographic characteristics as those who did not, except that the median age for the former was higher by 3 years (59 vs. 56). Our early data suggest that the current policy on waiting time modification for candidates affected by race-inclusive estimation of GFR has the potential to improve racial disparity in access to kidney transplantation. However, the generalizability of our findings to other centers requires further study.

Impact of age over 70 years in the new allocation system on the outcomes of heart transplantation in the US.

BACKGROUND: United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) allocation criteria changed in 2018 to accommodate the increased prevalence of patients on a ventricular assist device as a bridge to heart transplant and prioritize sicker people in anticipation of a heart graft. We aimed to assess the impact of patient age in the new allocation policy on mortality following heart transplantation. Secondary outcomes included the effect of age ≥70 on post-transplant events, including stroke, dialysis, pacemaker, and rejection requiring treatment. METHODS: The UNOS Registry was queried to identify patients who underwent heart transplants alone in the US between 2000 and 2021. Patients were divided into groups according to their age (over 70 and under 70 years old). RESULTS: Patients aged over 70 were more likely to require dialysis during follow-up, but less likely to experience rejection requiring treatment, compared with patients aged <70. Age ≥70 in the new allocation system was a significant predictor of 1-year mortality (adjusted HR: 1.41; 95% CI: 1.05-1.91; p = .024), but its effect on 5-year mortality was not significant after adjusting for potential confounders (adjusted HR: 1.27; 95% CI:.97-1.66; p = .077). Undergoing transplantation under the new allocation policy vs the old allocation policy was not a significant predictor of mortality in patients over 70 years old. CONCLUSIONS: Age ≥70 is a significant predictor of 1-year mortality following heart transplantation, but not at 5 and 10 years; however, the new allocation does not seem to have changed the outcomes for this group of patients.

Incidence and Risk Factors for Stroke After Combined Heart-Kidney and Heart-Liver Transplantation.

OBJECTIVE: While stroke is a well-recognized complication of isolated heart transplantation, stroke in patients undergoing simultaneous heart-liver (HLT) and heart-kidney transplantation (HKT) has not been explored. This study assessed postoperative stroke incidence, risk factors, and outcomes in HLT and HKT compared with isolated heart transplant. METHODS: The United Network for Organ Sharing database was queried for adult patients undergoing HLT, HKT, and isolated heart transplants between 1994 and 2022. Patients were stratified by presence of in-hospital stroke after transplant. Post-transplant survival at 1-year was assessed using Kaplan-Meier analysis and log-rank tests. Separate multivariable logistic regression models were constructed to identify risk factors for stroke after HKT and HLT. RESULTS: Of 2326 HKT recipients, 85 experienced stroke, and of 442 HLT recipients, 19 experienced stroke. Stroke was more common after HKT and HLT than after an isolated heart transplant (3.7% vs. 4.3% vs. 2.9%, p = 0.01). One-year post-transplant survival was lower in those with stroke among both HKT recipients (64.5% vs. 88.7%, p(log-rank) < 0.001) and HLT recipients (43.8% vs. 87.4%, p(log-rank) < 0.001. Pre-transplant pVAD, prior stroke, postoperative dialysis, diabetes, prior cardiac surgery, and heart cold ischemic time were independent risk factors for stroke after HKT, after adjusting for age, sex, and need for blood transfusion on the waitlist. For HLT, postoperative dialysis was a significant risk factor. CONCLUSIONS: Stroke is more common after HKT and HLT than after isolated heart transplant, and results in poor survival. Independent risk factors for stroke include pre-transplant percutaneous VAD (HKT) and postoperative dialysis (HKT and HLT).

The short and long-term prognostic influences of liver grafts with high bilirubin levels at the time of organ recovery.

BACKGROUND: Donors with hyperbilirubinemia are often not utilized for liver transplantation (LT) due to concerns about potential liver dysfunction and graft survival. The potential to mitigate organ shortages using such donors remains unclear. METHODS: This study analyzed adult deceased donor data from the United Network for Organ Sharing database (2002-2022). Hyperbilirubinemia was categorized as high total bilirubin (3.0-5.0 mg/dL) and very high bilirubin (≥5.0 mg/dL) in brain-dead donors. We assessed the impact of donor hyperbilirubinemia on 3-month and 3-year graft survival, comparing these outcomes to donors after circulatory death (DCD). RESULTS: Of 138 622 donors, 3452 (2.5%) had high bilirubin and 1999 (1.4%) had very high bilirubin levels. Utilization rates for normal, high, and very high bilirubin groups were 73.5%, 56.4%, and 29.2%, respectively. No significant differences were found in 3-month and 3-year graft survival between groups. Donors with high bilirubin had superior 3-year graft survival compared to DCD (hazard ratio .83, p = .02). Factors associated with inferior short-term graft survival included recipient medical condition in intensive care unit (ICU) and longer cold ischemic time; factors associated with inferior long-term graft survival included older donor age, recipient medical condition in ICU, older recipient age, and longer cold ischemic time. Donors with ≥10% macrosteatosis in the very high bilirubin group were also associated with worse 3-year graft survival (p = .04). DISCUSSION: The study suggests that despite many grafts with hyperbilirubinemia being non-utilized, acceptable post-LT outcomes can be achieved using donors with hyperbilirubinemia. Careful selection may increase utilization and expand the donor pool without negatively affecting graft outcome.

Outcomes of kidney, liver, and simultaneous liver and kidney transplants from hepatitis c infected donors to hepatitis c naïve recipients: A large single center experience.

BACKGROUND: With the introduction of direct-acting antiviral therapies (DAAs), the non-use rate of hepatitis C virus (HCV)-positive donor organs (D+) has decreased significantly. We present the donor, recipient, and transplant allograft characteristics, along with recipient outcomes, in one of the largest cohorts of HCV-D+ transplants into HCV-naïve recipients (R-). METHODS: Charts of HCV D+/R- kidney (KT), liver (LT), and simultaneous liver-kidney (SLKT) transplant recipients between January 2019 and July 2022 were reviewed. Primary outcomes of interest included waitlist times and 1-year graft failure. Secondary outcomes included hospital and intensive care unit length of stay, post-transplant complications, effectiveness of DAA therapy, and characteristics of patients who relapsed from initial DAA therapy. RESULTS: Fifty-five HCV D+/R- transplants at our center [42 KT (26 nucleic acid testing positive [NAT+], 16 NAT-), 12 LT (eight NAT+, four NAT-), and one SLKT (NAT+)] had a median waitlist time of 69 days for KT, 87 days for LT, and 15 days for SLKT. There were no graft failures at 1 year. All viremic recipients were treated with a 12-week course of DAAs, of which 100% achieved end of treatment response (EOTR)-85.7% (n = 30) achieved sustained virologic response (SVR) and 14.3% relapsed (n = 5; four KT, one LT). All relapsed recipients were retreated and achieved SVR. The most common post-transplantation complications include BK virus infection (n = 9) for KT and non-allograft infections (n = 4) for LT. CONCLUSIONS: Our study has demonstrated no graft failures or recipient deaths at 1 year, and despite a 14.3% relapse rate, we achieved 100% SVR. Complications rates of D+/R- appeared comparable to national D-/R- complication rates. Further studies comparing D+/R- to D-/R- outcomes are needed.

Does lung procurement and exposure to Perfadex impact heart transplantation outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: Some studies have shown increased incidence of Primary Graft Dysfunction (PGD) after heart and lung procurement for heart transplant recipients. There have been limited investigations of the impact of lung procurement on heart procurement and the potential effects of the exposure to the type of lung preservation solution, the volume of the lung preservation solution and adequacy of decompression of the heart during heart and lung procurement and the impact on heart transplant outcomes. METHODS: Adult heart transplant recipients in the UNOS database recorded from January 1, 2000 to June 30, 2022 formed the study cohort. Any heart that was procured with a lung team that utilized Perfadex preservation solution (XVIVO, Gothenburg, Sweden) was classified as exposed to Perfadex and otherwise classified as not exposed to Perfadex. Lung procurements performed with a preservation solution other than Perfadex or unknown were excluded (n = 2486). Simple comparisons were made with t-tests or chi-squared tests. Logistic regression models were used to predict 30 day and 1 year survival. Accelerated failure time models were employed to analyze time to death and time to rejection. RESULTS: The cohort consisted of 34 192 heart transplants, of which 21 928 donors were not exposed to Perfadex (64.1%). There were statistically, but not clinically, significant differences in donor characteristics for these groups including in donor age (33.34 ± 11.01 not exposed vs. 30.70 ± 10.69 exposed; p < .001), diabetic donor (4% not exposed vs. 3% exposed; p = .004), and ischemic time (3.28 ± 1.09 h not exposed vs. 3.24 ± 1.05 h exposed; p = .002). In adjusted models, for all included donors, Perfadex exposure was associated with increased short term mortality, but no long term difference (1 year mortality OR 1.10, p = .014). CONCLUSION: Perfadex exposure was associated with increased short-term mortality for heart transplant recipients. Mechanistic investigation is warranted.

Assessing the Role of Primary Heart Failure Etiology on Cardiac Transplant Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: There are diverse indications for heart transplantation (HTx), often categorized into ischemic (ICM) and nonischemic (NICM) cardiomyopathy. Although there is extensive research comparing the outcomes for these disease processes following certain therapeutic interventions, there are limited data on how recipient etiology impacts post-HTx survival. Our investigation seeks to identify this relationship. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis using adult HTx patients from the United Network for Organ Sharing database between 2000 and 2021. Patients with a combined heart-lung transplant or previous HTx were excluded. ICM included coronary artery disease (CAD) and ischemic dilated cardiomyopathy. NICM included nonischemic dilated (NIDCM), hypertrophic (HCM), and restrictive (RCM) cardiomyopathy. Overall survival was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier curves, log-rank tests, and multivariable Cox regression models. RESULTS: A total of 42 268 patients were included in our study. Recipients with ICM were older and more likely to be males, obese, diabetics, and smokers. We found that patients with ICM had an increased incidence of transplant CAD (OR = 1.23, p < 0.001) and risk of mortality (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.22, p < 0.001) compared to NICM. When NICM was expanded, RCM had a similar hazard risk compared to ICM (HR = 1.03, p = 0.650), whereas both NIDCM (HR = 0.81, p < 0.001) and HCM (HR = 0.70, p < 0.001) had improved survival. CONCLUSION: Our study provides evidence to suggest that ICM has decreased survival when compared to NICM. When NICM was expanded, RCM was found to have an increased mortality risk similar to ICM, whereas NIDCM and HCM both had superior outcomes. The clinical implication of this investigation will allow clinicians to better understand the prognosis of certain patient groups.

Procurement Trends, Indications, and Outcomes of Heart-Lung Transplantation in the Contemporary Era.

BACKGROUND: Evolving trends in organ procurement and technological innovation prompted an investigation into recent trends, indications, and outcomes following combined heart-lung transplantation (HLTx). METHODS: The United Network for Organ Sharing database was queried for all adult (≥18 years) HLTx performed between July 1, 2013 and June 30, 2023. Patients with previous transplants were excluded. The primary endpoint was the effect of donor, recipient, and transplantation characteristics on 1- and 5-year survival. Secondary analyses included a comparison of HLTx at high- and low-volume centers, an assessment of HLTx following donation after circulatory death (DCD), and an evaluation of HLTx volume over time. Cox proportional-hazards models were used to assess factors associated with mortality. Temporal trends were evaluated with linear regression. RESULTS: After exclusions, 319 patients were analyzed, of whom 5 (1.6%) were DCD. HLTx volume increased from 2013 to 2023 (p < 0.001). One- and 5-year survival following HLTx was 84.0% and 59.5%, respectively. One-year survival was higher for patients undergoing HLTx at a high-volume center (88.3% vs. 77.9%; p = 0.012). After risk adjustment, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support 72 h posttransplant and predischarge dialysis were associated with increased 1-year mortality (HR = 3.19, 95% CI = 1.86-5.49 and HR = 3.47, 95% CI = 2.17-5.54, respectively) and 5-year mortality (HR = 2.901, 95% CI = 1.679-5.011 and HR = 3.327, 95% CI = 2.085-5.311, respectively), but HLTx at a high-volume center was not associated with either. CONCLUSIONS: HLTx volume has resurged, with DCD HLTx emerging as a viable procurement strategy. Factors associated with 1- and 5-year survival may be used to guide postoperative management following HLTx.

Information design to support growth, quality, and equity of the US transplant system.

The Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network, an arm of the Health Resources and Services Administration, has a contract with the United Network for Organ Sharing since 1986 to provide central oversight of organ donation and transplants in the United States. The United Network for Organ Sharing has recently come under scrutiny, prompting a review by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine as summarized in its recent report and also by the US Senate Finance Committee. The national news services have opined about organ donation ethics, access to transplantation particularly for medically underserved populations, and management of organ transplantation data. These critiques raise important concerns that deserve our best response as a transplant community. Broadly, we suggest that the data management approach of the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network be replaced with a patient-centric omnichannel network in which all donor and recipient data exist in a single longitudinal record that can be used by all applications. A more comprehensive and standardized approach to donor data collection would drive quality improvement across organ procurement organizations and help address inequities in transplantation. Finally, a substantial increase in organ donation would be prompted by considering organ donors as a public health resource, meriting transparent publicly available data collection with respect to organ donor referral, screening, and management.

National Experience on Waitlist Outcomes for Down-Staging of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: High Dropout Rate in All-Comers.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) grants priority listing for liver transplant for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma after successful down-staging to Milan criteria. We evaluated the national experience on down-staging by comparing 2 down-staging groups: tumor burden meeting UNOS down-staging (UNOS-DS) inclusion criteria, and all-comers (AC)-DS with initial tumor burden beyond UNOS-DS criteria vs patients always within Milan criteria. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of the UNOS database of 23,398 patients listed for liver transplant who had submitted a hepatocellular carcinoma Model for End-Stage Liver Disease exception application from 2010 to 2019, classified as always within Milan (n = 20,579), UNOS-DS (n = 2151), and AC-DS (n = 668). RESULTS: The 2-year cumulative probabilities of dropout were 19% for Milan, 25% for UNOS-DS (P < .001), and 30% for AC-DS (P < .001). In multivariate analysis of the down-staging groups, factors predicting dropout included Model for End-Stage Liver Disease at listing (hazard ratio [HR], 1.06; P < .001) and initial total tumor diameter (HR, 1.04; P = .002). Compared with α-fetoprotein (AFP) level ≤20 ng/mL, AFP levels of 21 to 100, 101 to 1000, and greater than 1000 ng/mL were associated with a higher risk of dropout (HRs, 1.63, 2.06, and 4.58, respectively; P < .001). A subset of all-comers with AFP levels greater than 100 ng/mL had a 2-year probability of dropout of 52% vs 26% for all others beyond Milan criteria (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: All-comers had a significantly higher risk for waitlist dropout compared with the UNOS-DS and Milan groups after initial successful down-staging to Milan criteria. In particular, the subgroup of AC-DS with an AFP level greater than 100 ng/mL had a greater than 50% probability of dropout in the next 2 years. These observations suggest a high likelihood of failure when expanding the indications for down-staging.

Examining the transplant case composition of early-career transplant surgeons.

Fellowship training established by the American Society of Transplant Surgeons and certified by the Transplant Accreditation and Certification Council provides trainees with broad exposure and practice readiness for the core aspects of abdominal transplantation. However, the operative case mix of a new transplant surgeon early in practice is unknown. This study examined the volume and composition of the transplant case mix of early-career transplant surgeons to better inform residents interested in transplantation about potential career opportunities following fellowship. cas 209 early-career transplant surgeons were identified from the UNOS database containing encrypted surgeon-specific identifiers and were included in this study. At 5 years into practice, there were 85 (40.7%) kidney-predominant, 38 (18.2%) liver-predominant, and 86 (41.1%) multiorgan transplant surgeons. Comparing surgeon subgroups, multiorgan surgeons performed more transplants in year 5 of practice than both liver-predominant and kidney-predominant surgeons (both p < .05). This is the first study to describe the transplant case composition of the early-career transplant surgeons. This data can be used to inform aspiring transplant surgeons about potential career opportunities and to assist fellowship programs in guiding and mentoring fellows.

Does donor treatment with inotropes and/or vasopressors impact post-transplant outcomes?

PURPOSE: The purpose was to evaluate the effects of the most commonly used cardiac donor inotropes/vasopressors on subsequent post-heart transplant survival. METHODS: Adult heart transplant recipients from January 2000 to June 2022 were identified in the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) database. Exclusion criteria included: multiorgan transplants, donor age < 15, and recipient age < 18. Donors receiving vasoactive medications at the time of procurement were compared to donors not receiving these medications. Those on vasoactive medications were stratified by medication: phenylephrine, dopamine, dobutamine, norepinephrine and epinephrine, the combination of these agents, and the concomitant administration of vasopressin with any single agent alone or in combination. The primary area of interest was short-and-long-term survival. Survival at 30 days, 1 year, and long-term (Median = 13.6 years) was compared using logistic and Cox models to quantify survival endpoints. RESULTS: A total of 45,198 donors met inclusion criteria and had data on the use of vasoactive agents available. Mean donor age was 32.3 years with 71% male. Vasoactive medications and potential combinations included phenylephrine in 8156 donors (18.0%), dopamine in 9550 (21.1%), dobutamine in 718 (1.6%), epinephrine in 332 (.73%), and norepinephrine in 4854 (10.7%). A total of 25,856 donors (57.2%) were receiving vasopressin at the time of procurement. There was no impact of donor inotropes on 30-day survival. Donors receiving one inotrope and no vasopressin were associated with increased 1 year mortality (OR 1.14; p = .021), as were donors receiving 2+ inotropes and no vasopressin (OR 1.26; p = .006). For individual agents, 1 year mortality was increased for dopamine (OR 1.11; p = .042) and epinephrine (OR 1.59; p = .004). CONCLUSIONS: There is no difference in heart transplant recipient survival at 30 days when the donor is receiving inotropes without vasopressin at the time of procurement. Inotropic support without vasopressin is associated with greater 1 year mortality. The impact of donor inotropic support on long term heart transplant survival, and the interaction with vasopressin warrants further study.

Impact of new allocation system on length of stay following heart transplantation in the United States.

BACKGROUND: United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) allocation criteria changed in 2018 to accommodate the increased prevalence of ventricular assist device use as a bridge to heart transplant, which consequently prioritized sicker patients. We aimed to assess the impact of this new allocation policy on the length of stay following heart transplantation. Secondary outcomes include other risk factors for prolonged hospitalization and its effect on mortality and postoperative complications. METHODS: The UNOS Registry was queried to identify patients who underwent isolated heart transplants in the United States between 2001 and 2023. Patients were divided into quartiles according to their respective length of stay. RESULTS: A total of 57 020 patients were included, 15 357 of which were allocated with the new system. The median hospital length of stay was 15 days (mean 22.7 days). Length of stay was longer in the new allocation era (25 ± 30 vs. 22 ± 27 days, p < .001). The longer length of stay was associated with increased 5-year mortality in the new allocation system (aHR: 1.18; 95% CI: 1.15, 1.20; p-value: < .001). CONCLUSION: Longer hospital stays and associated observed increased risk for mortality in the era after the allocation criteria change reflect the rationale of this shift which was to prioritize heart transplants for sicker patients. Further studies are needed to track the progress of surgical and perioperative management of these studies over time.

Do outcomes for heart transplantation differ based on donor and recipient race?

PURPOSE: There are limited data examining the impact of both donor and recipient race on outcomes following orthotopic heart transplant (OHT). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the relationship between donor and recipient race and OHT outcomes. METHODS: The United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) database was retrospectively reviewed from January 2000 to March 2018 for donor hearts. A comparison was conducted based on donor and recipient race (White, Black, Hispanic, Other/Unknown). Races for which there were limited numbers were excluded from the analysis (Asian, n = 1292; American Indian, n = 132; Pacific Islander, n = 132, Multiple ethnicities, n = 225). The primary endpoint was survival at 30 days, 1 year survival, and post-transplant rejection. Logistic and Cox models were used to quantify survival endpoints. RESULTS: A total of 41 841 OHT were included. Of the recipients, 29 894 (71%) were White, 8475 (20%) were Black, and 3472 (8%) were Hispanic. Of the donors 27 783 (66%) were White, 6277 (15%) were Black, 6576 (16%) were Hispanic, and 1205 (3%) were Unknown/Other race. In a comparison of recipient demographics, White recipients were older (54.09 ± 12.21 years) compared to Black (49.44 ± 12.83 years) and Hispanic (49.97 ± 13.27 years) recipients. All other differences between groups were not clinically significant. Black recipients were more likely to receive a heart with an "urgent" status (probability .80) compared to White (.73) and Hispanic (.75) recipients (p < .001). Hispanic recipients were more likely to receive a transplant when listed as "non-urgent" (Probability .47) compared to White (.37) and Black (.30) recipients (p < .001). In terms of outcomes, compared to White recipients, Hispanic patients experienced a decreased 30-day survival (OR 1.27; p = .011) and 1-year survival (OR 1.17; p = .016). In comparing Donor/Recipient combinations compared to a White Donor/White Recipient combination, overall survival was decreased in White donor/African American recipient (HR 1.36; p < .001), African American donor/African American recipient (HR 1.41; p < .001) and Hispanic donor/African American recipient (HR 1.30; p < .001) combinations (Table 1). CONCLUSIONS: African American and Hispanic recipients have decreased survival compared to White recipients after heart transplant. The African American donor does not decrease survival. Racial differences still exist in donor and recipient characteristics and recipient outcomes after OHT. Increasing the donor pool for all races and ethnicities would potentially benefit all recipients. Continued study is warranted in order to minimize these differences among recipients and identify factors that could be contributing to decreased survival, in order to optimize outcomes for African American and Hispanic recipients post-transplant and eliminate disparities.

Predicted heart mass based on ideal body weight for donor-to-recipient size matching.

BACKGROUND: Predicted heart mass (PHM) is a commonly used tool for donor-to-recipient size matching. However, incorporating body weight as part of PHM can be considered problematic given its high variability, and low metabolic nature of fat. We sought to assess whether substituting the actual donor and recipient weight with the ideal body weight (IBW) would affect the association of donor-to-recipient PHM ratio with 1-year and overall survival after heart transplantation. METHODS: The United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) database was queried for adult patients who received a primary heart transplant between January 2000 and September 2021. RESULTS: Both PHM and ideal PHM (IPHM) ratios were associated with one-year (PHM: p = .003; IPHM: p = .0007) and overall (PHM: p = .02; IPHM: p = .02) survival. In the continuous analysis with restricted cubic splines, both PHM (p = .0003) and IPHM (p = .00001) were associated with relative hazards of death. CONCLUSION: IPHM is significantly associated with post-transplant survival and may be a useful compliment to PHM.

Repeat pediatric heart transplantation: A united network for organ sharing database analysis.

BACKGROUND: A history of congenital heart disease and previous transplantation are each independently associated with worse survival following pediatric heart transplantation. This study aimed to evaluate the characteristics and outcomes of children undergoing repeat heart transplantation in the United States based on the underlying diagnosis. METHODS: The United Network for Organ Sharing database was used to identify 8111 patients aged <18 years undergoing isolated heart transplantation from 2000 to 2021, including 435 (5.4%) repeat transplants. Restricted cubic spline analysis assessed the non-linear relationship between inter-transplant interval and the primary outcome of all-cause mortality or re-transplantation. Multivariable Cox regression assessed the impact of re-transplantation on the primary outcome. Median follow-up was 5.0 (interquartile range 1.9-9.9) years. RESULTS: Repeat transplant patients were older (median age 12 vs. 4 years; p < .001), and less likely to be in UNOS status 1A (66.0%, n = 287 vs. 81.0% n = 6217; p < .001) than primary transplant patients. Freedom from the primary outcome was 51.4% (95% confidence interval [CI] 45.5-57.2) among repeat transplants and 70.5% (95% CI 69.2-71.8) among primary transplants at 10 years (p < .001). Among repeat transplant patients, the relative hazard of the primary outcome became non-significant when the inter-transplant interval >3.6 years. Congenital heart disease was an independent predictor of mortality among primary (HR 1.8, 95% CI 1.6-1.9) but not repeat transplant (HR 1.1, 95% CI .8-1.6) patients. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term outcomes remain poor for patients undergoing repeat heart transplantation, particularly those with an inter-transplant interval <3.6 years. Underlying diagnosis does not impact outcomes after repeat transplantation, after accounting for other risk factors.

Has the risk of liver re-transplantation improved over the two decades?

BACKGROUND: Despite advancements in liver transplantation (LT) over the past two decades, liver re-transplantation (re-LT) presents challenges. This study aimed to assess improvements in re-LT outcomes and contributing factors. METHODS: Data from the United Network for Organ Sharing database (2002-2021) were analyzed, with recipients categorized into four-year intervals. Trends in re-LT characteristics and postoperative outcomes were evaluated. RESULTS: Of 128,462 LT patients, 7254 received re-LT. Graft survival (GS) for re-LT improved (91.3%, 82.1%, and 70.8% at 30 days, 1 year, and 3 years post-LT from 2018 to 2021). However, hazard ratios (HRs) for GS remained elevated compared to marginal donors including donors after circulatory death (DCD), although the difference in HRs decreased in long-term GS. Changes in re-LT causes included a reduction in hepatitis C recurrence and an increase in graft failure post-primary LT involving DCD. Trends identified included recent decreased cold ischemic time (CIT) and increased distance from donor hospital in re-LT group. Meanwhile, DCD cohort exhibited less significant increase in distance and more marked decrease in CIT. The shortest CIT was recorded in urgent re-LT group. The highest Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score was observed in urgent re-LT group, while the lowest was recorded in DCD group. Analysis revealed shorter time interval between previous LT and re-listing, leading to worse outcomes, and varying primary graft failure causes influencing overall survival post-re-LT. DISCUSSION: While short-term re-LT outcomes improved, challenges persist compared to DCD. Further enhancements are required, with ongoing research focusing on optimizing risk stratification models and allocation systems for better LT outcomes.