Impact of deceased organ donor marijuana use on donor culture positivity and solid organ transplant recipient outcomes.

With the increasing prevalence of marijuana use in the US, many deceased organ donors have a history of marijuana use, raising concerns about infectious risks to transplant recipients. We performed a multicenter retrospective cohort study in which exposed donors were those with recent marijuana use (in the prior 12 months) and unexposed donors were those with no recent marijuana use. Primary outcomes included the following: (1) positive donor cultures for bacteria or fungi, (2) recipient infection due to bacteria or fungi within 3 months posttransplant, and (3) recipient graft failure or death within 12 months posttransplant. Multivariable regression was used to evaluate the relationship between donor marijuana use and each outcome. A total of 658 recipients who received organs from 394 donors were included. Recent marijuana use was not associated with donor culture positivity (aOR: 0.84, 95% CI: 0.39-1.81, P = .65), recipient infection (aHR: 1.02, 95% CI: 0.76-1.38, P = .90), or recipient graft failure or death (aHR: 1.65, 95% CI: 0.90-3.02, P = .11). Our data suggest that organs from donors with a history of recent marijuana use do not pose significant infectious risks in the early posttransplant period.

Characterizing proximity and transfers of deceased organ donors to donor care units in the United States.

Some United States organ procurement organizations transfer deceased organ donors to donor care units (DCUs) for recovery procedures. We used Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network data, from April 2017 to June 2021, to describe the proximity of adult deceased donors after brain death to DCUs and understand the impact of donor service area (DSA) boundaries on transfer efficiency. Among 19 109 donors (56.1% of the cohort) in 25 DSAs with DCUs, a majority (14 593 [76.4%]) were in hospitals within a 2-hour drive. In areas with DCUs detectable in the study data set, a minority of donors (3582 of 11 532 [31.1%]) were transferred to a DCU; transfer rates varied between DSAs (median, 27.7%, range, 4.0%-96.5%). Median hospital-to-DCU driving times were not meaningfully shorter among transferred donors (50 vs 51 minutes for not transferred, P < .001). When DSA boundaries were ignored, 3241 cohort donors (9.5%) without current DCU access were managed in hospitals within 2 hours of a DCU and thus potentially eligible for transfer. In summary, approximately half of United States deceased donors after brain death are managed in hospitals in DSAs with a DCU. Transfer of donors between DSAs may increase DCU utilization and improve system efficiency.

COVID-19 in organ donors: An organ procurement organization perspective.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic presented a significant challenge for Organ Procurement Organizations (OPOs) with the use of SARS-CoV-2 positive donors varying widely. This study used detailed single OPO data to determine the success of using SARS-CoV-2 positive donors. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study including all SARS-CoV-2 positive donors referred to the Gift of Life OPO from January 1, 2021, to June 30, 2023. Descriptive analyses were performed to characterize referral and organ utilization. RESULTS: There were 861 organ referrals with 1 positive SARS-Cov-2 test: 282 were ruled out with telephone evaluation, 431 referrals were ruled out with onsite evaluation ("evaluated nondonors") and 148 became donors. For donors who had both nasopharyngeal and lower respiratory testing completed, there was notable result discordance observed. Median cycle threshold (Ct) values were similar between donors and evaluated nondonors with no change in median donor Ct values over the study period. Transplanted organs from COVID-positive donors included 27 hearts, 88 livers, 5 pancreata, and 107 kidneys; no lung donation occurred. The proportion of COVID-positive donors significantly increased over the study period. CONCLUSION: This large volume donor referral study demonstrates increasing COVID-19 referrals progressing to donation over time, supporting the increased use of these donors for nonlung transplantation.

Developing online communication training to request donation for vascularized composite allotransplantation (VCA): improving performance to match new US organ donation targets.

BACKGROUND: Approaching families of dying or newly deceased patients to donate organs requires specialized knowledge and a mastery of relational communication. As the transplantation field has progressed, Donation Professionals (DPs) are also leading conversations with family decision makers (FDMs) about the donation of uncommon anatomical gifts, such as face, hands, genitalia, referred to as Vascularized Composite Allotransplants (VCA) without much training or experience. To address the need for training, we adapted and beta tested an evidenced-based communication training program for donation discussions to VCA requests. The overarching goal of Communicating Effectively about Donation for Vascularized Composite Allotransplantation (CEaD-VCA) is to increase the number of VCA authorizations and to improve the socioemotional outcomes of FDMs. METHODS: We developed CEaD-VCA, an online, on-demand training program based on the previously tested, evidenced-based communication skills training program designed to train DPs to have conversations about solid organ donation. The training was modified utilizing data from a national telephone survey with DPs and results of 6 focus groups conducted with members of the general public. The survey and focus groups assessed knowledge, attitudes, and barriers to VCA donation. The training was shaped by a partnership with a leading industry partner, the Gift of Life Institute.™ RESULTS: Using the results as a guide, the existing CEaD training program, consisting of interactive eLearning modules, was adapted to include technical information about VCA, foundational communication skills, and two interactive example VCA donation request scenarios to facilitate active learning. Forty-two DPs from two partner Organ Procurement Organizations (OPOs) participated in the beta test of CEaD-VCA. Pre- and post-test surveys assessed the impact of the training. CONCLUSIONS: The training was scored highly by DPs in effectiveness and ease of use. This project created a standardized, accessible, and comprehensive training for DPs to communicate about VCA donation. CEaD-VCA is an example of how to develop a communication skills training for difficult conversations utilizing input from stakeholders, guided by communication theory. It also demonstrates how gaps in communication skills during medical education can be filled utilizing advanced online Learning Management Systems. The training specifically addresses new CMS rules concerning OPO performance metrics.

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for cardiopulmonary failure in organ donation: Assessing liver transplant outcomes.

Liver transplantation continues to face significant organ shortages and efficient utilization of marginal donors is paramount. This study evaluates the practice patterns and outcomes in liver transplantation when utilizing allografts from marginal donors who required extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) support. We performed a retrospective review of the Gift of Life (PA, NJ, DE) organ-procuring organization database for transplants performed using donors supported on ECMO for nondonation purposes. These were cross-referenced to the transplant recipients within the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network database, and the outcomes of liver transplants using donors on ECMO support were compared with those not requiring ECMO. Organ use and nonuse patterns were then evaluated in ECMO-supported donors, identifying the factors associated with nonuse compared with the factors associated with graft failure. Thirty-nine of the 84 ECMO-supported donors contributing at least one intra-abdominal organ for transplant donated a liver. Graft survival and patient survival up to 5 years were comparable between transplants from ECMO and non-ECMO-supported donors, and no cases of primary nonfunction were seen in the ECMO group. ECMO support was not associated with 1-year graft failure on regression modeling. Additional regression analyses within the ECMO donor population identified bacteremia (HR: 19.81) and elevated total bilirubin at donation (HR: 2.44) as predictive of post-transplant graft failure. Livers from donors supported on ECMO before donation appear safe to use in select transplant settings. Better understanding of the impact of predonation ECMO on liver allograft function will help guide the optimal use of these scarcely used donors.

Beyond donation to organ utilization in the USA.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The deceased donor organ pool has broadened beyond young, otherwise healthy head trauma victims. But an abundance of donated organs only benefits patients if they are accepted, expeditiously transported and actually transplanted. This review focuses on postdonation challenges and opportunities to increase the number of transplants through improved organ utilization. RECENT FINDINGS: We build upon recently proposed changes in terminology for measuring organ utilization. Among organs recovered for transplant, the nonuse rate (NUR REC ) has risen above 25% for kidneys and pancreata. Among donors, the nonuse rate (NUR DON ) has risen to 40% for livers and exceeds 70% for thoracic organs. Programme-level variation in offer acceptance rates vastly exceeds variation in the traditional, 1-year survival benchmark. Key opportunities to boost utilization include donation after circulatory death and hepatitis C virus (HCV)+ organs; acute kidney injury and suboptimal biopsy kidneys; older and steatotic livers. SUMMARY: Underutilization of less-than-ideal, yet transplant-worthy organs remains an obstacle to maximizing the impact of the U.S. transplant system. The increased risk of inferior posttransplant outcomes must always be weighed against the risks of remaining on the waitlist. Advanced perfusion technologies; tuning allocation systems for placement efficiency; and data-driven clinical decision support have the potential to increase utilization of medically complex organs.

Impact of donor multidrug-resistant organisms on solid organ transplant recipient outcomes.

BACKGROUND: The impact of donor colonization or infection with multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) on solid organ transplant (SOT) recipient outcomes remains uncertain. We thus evaluated the association between donor MDROs and risk of posttransplant infection, graft failure, and mortality. METHODS: A multicenter retrospective cohort study was performed. All SOT recipients with a local deceased donor were included. The cohort was divided into three exposure groups: recipients whose donors had (1) an MDRO, (2) a non-MDRO bacterial or candidal organism, or (3) no growth on cultures. The primary outcomes were (1) bacterial or invasive candidal infection within 3 months and (2) graft failure or death within 12 months posttransplant. Mixed effect multivariable frailty models were developed to evaluate each association. RESULTS: Of 658 total SOT recipients, 93 (14%) had a donor with an MDRO, 477 (73%) had a donor with a non-MDRO organism, and 88 (13%) had a donor with no organisms on culture. On multivariable analyses, donor MDROs were associated with a significantly increased hazard of infection compared to those with negative donor cultures (adjust hazard ratio [aHR] 1.63, 95% CI 1.01-2.62, p = .04) but were not associated with graft failure or death (aHR 0.45, 95% CI 0.15-1.36, p = .16). CONCLUSIONS: MDROs on donor culture increase the risk of early posttransplant infection but do not appear to affect long-term graft or recipient survival, suggesting organ donors with MDROs on culture may be safely utilized. Future studies aimed at reducing early posttransplant infections associated with donor MDROs are needed.

Impact of deceased organ donor injection drug use on donor culture positivity and recipient outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Due to the ongoing opioid epidemic in the United States, deceased organ donors increasingly have a history of injection drug use (IDU), raising concerns about infectious risks to solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients. We sought to determine how recent IDU among deceased organ donors impacted donor culture results and recipient outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed at three transplant centers. Exposed donors were those with "recent IDU" (in the prior 12 months). Primary outcomes included (1) positive donor cultures for bacteria or Candida species, (2) recipient bacterial or Candida infection within 3 months posttransplant, and (3) recipient graft failure or death within 12 months posttransplant. Mixed effects multivariable regression models were used to evaluate the relationship between recent donor IDU and each outcome. RESULTS: A total of 658 SOT recipients who received organs from 394 donors were included. Sixty-six (17%) donors had a history of recent IDU. Recent IDU in donors was associated with a significantly increased odds of donor culture positivity (aOR 3.65, 95% CI 1.06-12.60, p = .04) but was not associated with SOT recipient infection (aHR 0.98, 95% CI 0.71-1.36, p = .92) or graft failure or death (aHR 0.67, 95% CI 0.29-1.51, p = .33). CONCLUSION: Donors with recent IDU are more likely to have positive cultures, but their recipients' outcomes are unaffected, suggesting organs from donors with recent IDU may be safely utilized.

Antibiotic Utilization in Deceased Organ Donors.

Antibiotic use in deceased organ donors has not been previously described. In a retrospective cohort of 440 donors, we found 427 (97%) received at least one antibiotic course, 312 (71%) received broad-spectrum antibiotics, and 61 (14%) received potentially redundant antibiotics during their terminal hospitalization, suggesting a need for stewardship.

Impact of deceased donor multidrug-resistant bacterial organisms on organ utilization.

The extent to which donor multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) affect organ utilization remains unclear. We performed a retrospective cohort study at 4 transplant centers between 2015 and 2016 to evaluate this question. All deceased donors who donated at least one organ were included. Exposed donors had at least one MDRO on culture. Unexposed donors had no MDRO-positive cultures. Only cultures obtained during the donor's terminal hospitalization were evaluated. Multivariable regression was used to determine the association between donor MDRO and (1) number of organs transplanted per donor and (2) the match run at which each organ was accepted. Subsequently, we restricted the analysis to donors with MDR-Gram-negative (GN) organisms. Of 440 total donors, 29 (7%) donors grew MDROs and 7 (2%) grew MDR-GNs. There was no significant association between donor MDRO and either measure of organ utilization. However, donor MDR-GNs were associated with a significant reduction in the number of organs transplanted per donor (incidence rate ratio 0.43, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.39-0.48, P < .01), and organs were accepted significantly further down the match list (relative count 5.08, 95% CI 1.64-15.68, P = .01). Though donor MDR-GNs were infrequent in our study, their growing prevalence could meaningfully reduce the donor pool over time.

Risk factors for multidrug-resistant organisms among deceased organ donors.

Donor infection or colonization with a multidrug-resistant organism (MDRO) affects organ utilization and recipient antibiotic management. Approaches to identifying donors at risk of carrying MDROs are unknown. We sought to determine the risk factors for MDROs among transplant donors. A multicenter retrospective cohort study was conducted at four transplant centers between 2015 and 2016. All deceased donors who donated at least one organ were included. Cultures obtained during the donor's terminal hospitalization and organ procurement were evaluated. The primary outcome was isolation of an MDRO on culture. Multivariable Cox regression was used to determine risk factors associated with time to donor MDRO. Of 440 total donors, 64 (15%) donors grew an MDRO on culture. Predictors of an MDRO on donor culture included hepatitis C viremia (hazard ratio [HR] 4.09, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.71-9.78, P = .002), need for dialysis (HR 4.59, 95% CI 1.09-19.21, P = .037), prior hematopoietic cell transplant (HR 7.57, 95% CI 1.03-55.75, P = .047), and exposure to antibiotics with a narrow gram-negative spectrum (HR 1.13, 95% CI 1.00-1.27, P = .045). This is the first study to determine risk factors for MDROs among deceased donors and will be important for risk stratifying potential donors and informing transplant recipient prophylaxis.

Transplanting hepatitis C virus-infected hearts into uninfected recipients: A single-arm trial.

The advent of direct-acting antiviral therapy for hepatitis C virus (HCV) has generated tremendous interest in transplanting organs from HCV-infected donors. We conducted a single-arm trial of orthotopic heart transplantation (OHT) from HCV-infected donors into uninfected recipients, followed by elbasvir/grazoprevir treatment after recipient HCV was first detected (NCT03146741; sponsor: Merck). We enrolled OHT candidates aged 40-65 years; left ventricular assist device (LVAD) support and liver disease were exclusions. We accepted hearts from HCV-genotype 1 donors. From May 16, 2017 to May 10, 2018, 20 patients consented for screening and enrolled, and 10 (median age 52.5 years; 80% male) underwent OHT. The median wait from UNOS opt-in for HCV nucleic-acid-test (NAT)+ donor offers to OHT was 39 days (interquartile range [IQR] 17-57). The median donor age was 34 years (IQR 31-37). Initial recipient HCV RNA levels ranged from 25 IU/mL to 40 million IU/mL, but all 10 patients had rapid decline in HCV NAT after elbasvir/grazoprevir treatment. Nine recipients achieved sustained virologic response at 12 weeks (SVR-12). The 10th recipient had a positive cross-match, experienced antibody-mediated rejection and multi-organ failure, and died on day 79. No serious adverse events occurred from HCV transmission or treatment. These short-term results suggest that HCV-negative candidates transplanted with HCV-infected hearts have acceptable outcomes.

Twelve-Month Outcomes After Transplant of Hepatitis C-Infected Kidneys Into Uninfected Recipients: A Single-Group Trial.

Background: Organs from hepatitis C virus (HCV)-infected deceased donors are often discarded. Preliminary data from 2 small trials, including THINKER-1 (Transplanting Hepatitis C kidneys Into Negative KidnEy Recipients), suggested that HCV-infected kidneys could be safely transplanted into HCV-negative patients. However, intermediate-term data on quality of life and renal function are needed to counsel patients about risk. Objective: To describe 12-month HCV treatment outcomes, estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), and quality of life for the 10 kidney recipients in THINKER-1 and 6-month data on 10 additional recipients. Design: Open-label, nonrandomized trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02743897). Setting: Single center. Participants: 20 HCV-negative transplant candidates. Intervention: Participants underwent transplant with kidneys infected with genotype 1 HCV and received elbasvir-grazoprevir on posttransplant day 3. Measurements: The primary outcome was HCV cure. Exploratory outcomes included 1) RAND-36 Physical Component Summary (PCS) and Mental Component Summary (MCS) quality-of-life scores at enrollment and after transplant, and 2) posttransplant renal function, which was compared in a 1:5 matched sample with recipients of HCV-negative kidneys. Results: The mean age of THINKER participants was 56.3 years (SD, 6.7), 70% were male, and 40% were black. All 20 participants achieved HCV cure. Hepatic and renal complications were transient or were successfully managed. Mean PCS and MCS quality-of-life scores decreased at 4 weeks; PCS scores then increased above pretransplant values, whereas MCS scores returned to baseline values. Estimated GFRs were similar between THINKER participants and matched recipients of HCV-negative kidneys at 6 months (median, 67.5 vs. 66.2 mL/min/1.73 m2; 95% CI for between-group difference, -4.2 to 7.5 mL/min/1.73 m2) and 12 months (median, 72.8 vs. 67.2 mL/min/1.73 m2; CI for between-group difference, -7.2 to 9.8 mL/min/1.73 m2). Limitation: Small trial. Conclusion: Twenty HCV-negative recipients of HCV-infected kidneys experienced HCV cure, good quality of life, and excellent renal function. Kidneys from HCV-infected donors may be a valuable transplant resource. Primary Funding Source: Merck.

Hepatitis C virus genotyping of organ donor samples to aid in transplantation of HCV-positive organs.

Given the availability of new highly efficacious anti-HCV therapies, some clinicians have advocated for wider use of kidneys from hepatitis C virus-positive (HCV+) donors, including transplanting them into HCV-negative recipients. As treatment regimens for HCV are commonly guided by genotype, pretransplant HCV genotyping of tissue donors would be beneficial. To our knowledge, donor HCV genotyping has never been reported. We retrieved archived frozen plasma samples for 17 previous organ donors through a local organ procurement organization. We performed HCV genotyping using the eSensor HCVg Direct Test (GenMark Diagnostics) and also by Sanger sequencing, for confirmation (Retrogen). In addition, viral loads were measured using the COBAS AmpliPrep/TaqMan system (Roche Diagnostics). We found that most of the samples (n = 14) were HCV Genotype 1a with the remainder being Genotype 2b (n = 1) or Genotype 3 (n = 2). All genotyping results were concordant with Sanger sequencing. The average HCV viral load in the sample group was ~ 1.6 million IU/mL (range: ~16 000 IU/mL to 7 million IU/mL). We demonstrate that viral RNA from organ donor plasma can be successfully genotyped for HCV. This ability suggests that transplantation of HCV+ kidneys into HCV-negative recipients, followed by genotype-guided antiviral therapy, could be feasible.

Deceased organ donor screening for human immunodeficiency virus, hepatitis B virus and hepatitis C virus: Discordant serology and nucleic acid testing results.

BACKGROUND: Before the 2014 policy change pertaining to infectious disease screening, many organ procurement organizations (OPOs) were supplementing serologic screening of deceased organ donors with nucleic acid testing (NAT) for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV-1), hepatitis B virus (HBV), and hepatitis C virus (HCV). The number of seronegative, NAT-positive donors has not been directly measured. METHODS: HIV, HBV, and HCV screening results of 11 229 donor referrals evaluated from 2010 to 2013 were obtained from 3 OPO-affiliated laboratories, capturing 35% of all donors in the United States. Laboratories used either polymerase chain reaction assay or transcription-mediated amplification assay to test 9643 deceased donors by NAT. RESULTS: The NAT results were positive in 21 (0.2%), 1 (0.02%), and 11 (0.1%) donors who were seronegative for HIV, HBV, and HCV, respectively. All discordant HIV-1 results were from one laboratory using a polymrease chain reaction assay. Thirteen of the reactive HIV NAT results in seronegative referrals were repeated and were non-reproducibly positive (NRP). Ten (0.1%), 452 (7.8%), and 197 (2.2%) of HIV-, HBV-, and HCV-seropositive donors, respectively, were negative by NAT. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights the importance of robust quality assurance to minimize NRP NAT results. NAT may allow for increased utilization of organs from HBV- and HCV-seropositive, NAT-negative donors.

Impact of Cognitive Load on Family Decision Makers' Recall and Understanding of Donation Requests for the Genotype-Tissue Expression (GTEx) Project.

Genomic research projects that collect tissues from deceased organ and tissue donors must obtain the authorization of family decision makers under difficult circumstances that may affect the authorization process. Using a quasi-experimental design, the Ethical, Legal, and Social Issues (ELSI) substudy of the Genotype-Tissue Expression (GTEx) project compared the recall and understanding of the donation authorization process of two groups: family members who had authorized donation of tissues to the GTEx project (the comparison group) and family members who had authorized organ and tissue donations in years previous, who subsequently participated in two different mock-authorization processes that mimicked the GTEx authorization process (the intervention groups). Participants in the comparison and intervention groups were matched on key demographic characteristics. We found that participants in the intervention groups who experienced a mock-authorization process demonstrated better recall of the tissue donation request than members of the comparison group. Our data indicate that the stress associated with the loss of a loved one limited the ability of family members to recall details about the GTEx project. However, we found a similar lack of knowledge in both the comparison and the intervention group participants, suggesting lack of knowledge may be due to the complexity and unfamiliarity of the information presented to them during the authorization process. We discuss these findings in the context of everyday clinical decision making in cognitively challenging conditions.

Management of the Potential Organ Donor in the ICU: Society of Critical Care Medicine/American College of Chest Physicians/Association of Organ Procurement Organizations Consensus Statement.

This document was developed through the collaborative efforts of the Society of Critical Care Medicine, the American College of Chest Physicians, and the Association of Organ Procurement Organizations. Under the auspices of these societies, a multidisciplinary, multi-institutional task force was convened, incorporating expertise in critical care medicine, organ donor management, and transplantation. Members of the task force were divided into 13 subcommittees, each focused on one of the following general or organ-specific areas: death determination using neurologic criteria, donation after circulatory death determination, authorization process, general contraindications to donation, hemodynamic management, endocrine dysfunction and hormone replacement therapy, pediatric donor management, cardiac donation, lung donation, liver donation, kidney donation, small bowel donation, and pancreas donation. Subcommittees were charged with generating a series of management-related questions related to their topic. For each question, subcommittees provided a summary of relevant literature and specific recommendations. The specific recommendations were approved by all members of the task force and then assembled into a complete document. Because the available literature was overwhelmingly comprised of observational studies and case series, representing low-quality evidence, a decision was made that the document would assume the form of a consensus statement rather than a formally graded guideline. The goal of this document is to provide critical care practitioners with essential information and practical recommendations related to management of the potential organ donor, based on the available literature and expert consensus.

Donor hemodynamic profile presages graft survival in donation after cardiac death liver transplantation.

Obligatory exposure to a period of warm ischemia is the defining feature of liver allografts from donation after cardiac death (DCD) donors. We explored novel methods for characterizing the dynamic aspects of donor warm ischemia that might be useful in assessing organ quality. The hemodynamic profile during donor warm ischemia was retrospectively studied for 110 Maastricht category III DCD donors. Three methods were used to summarize the hemodynamic changes after extubation: (1) the area under the systolic blood pressure curve (AUCSBP), (2) the slope of the systolic blood pressure regressed onto the time from extubation until cross-clamping, and (3) the slope of the systolic blood pressure regressed onto the time from extubation but calculated with only the values during the first 10 minutes after extubation (SBP10). Stepwise multivariate Cox models were created to study the association of these measures with graft survival. The duration of the donor warm ischemia time (23.6 ± 8.5 minutes) was not associated with graft survival (P = 0.35), although AUCSBP and SBP10 demonstrated significant associations (P = 0.02 and P = 0.05, respectively) in a univariate analysis. Multivariate regression models incorporating donor and recipient covariates indicated that among all covariates, SBP10 had the closest association with graft survival (hazard ratio = 1.08, P = 0.01). This association was even stronger when SBP10 was dichotomized into values above or below the median (-7.2 mm Hg/minute). Patients with SBP10s steeper than the median had an estimated 5-year graft survival rate of 76%, whereas patients with slopes less than the median had a 5-year survival rate of 45% (P < 0.007). In conclusion, the incorporation of novel methods for characterizing the donor warm ischemia time may help in selecting DCD liver allografts with favorable outcomes.