Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
1.
Am J Transplant ; 17(2): 519-527, 2017 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27456927

ABSTRACT

The impact of interferon (IFN)-free direct-acting antiviral (DAA) hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatments on utilization and outcomes associated with HCV-positive deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) is largely unknown. Using the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients, we identified 25 566 HCV-positive DDLT recipients from 2005 to 2015 and compared practices according to the introduction of DAA therapies using modified Poisson regression. The proportion of HCV-positive recipients who received HCV-positive livers increased from 6.9% in 2010 to 16.9% in 2015. HCV-positive recipients were 61% more likely to receive an HCV-positive liver after 2010 (early DAA/IFN era) (aRR:1.45 1.611.79 , p < 0.001) and almost three times more likely to receive one after 2013 (IFN-free DAA era) (aRR:2.58 2.853.16 , p < 0.001). Compared to HCV-negative livers, HCV-positive livers were 3 times more likely to be discarded from 2005 to 2010 (aRR:2.69 2.993.34 , p < 0.001), 2.2 times more likely after 2010 (aRR:1.80 2.162.58 , p < 0.001) and 1.7 times more likely after 2013 (aRR:1.37 1.682.04 , p < 0.001). Donor HCV status was not associated with increased risk of all-cause graft loss (p = 0.1), and this did not change over time (p = 0.8). Use of HCV-positive livers has increased dramatically, coinciding with the advent of DAAs. However, the discard rate remains nearly double that of HCV-negative livers. Further optimization of HCV-positive liver utilization is necessary to improve access for all candidates.


Subject(s)
Hepacivirus/isolation & purification , Hepatitis C/surgery , Liver Transplantation , Tissue Donors , Tissue and Organ Procurement/statistics & numerical data , Transplants/virology , Waiting Lists , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Graft Survival , Hepatitis C/drug therapy , Hepatitis C/virology , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Transplant Recipients , Treatment Outcome , Young Adult
2.
Am J Transplant ; 16(7): 2077-84, 2016 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26752290

ABSTRACT

Choosing between multiple living kidney donors, or evaluating offers in kidney paired donation, can be challenging because no metric currently exists for living donor quality. Furthermore, some deceased donor (DD) kidneys can result in better outcomes than some living donor kidneys, yet there is no way to compare them on the same scale. To better inform clinical decision-making, we created a living kidney donor profile index (LKDPI) on the same scale as the DD KDPI, using Cox regression and adjusting for recipient characteristics. Donor age over 50 (hazard ratio [HR] per 10 years = 1.15 1.241.33 ), elevated BMI (HR per 10 units = 1.01 1.091.16 ), African-American race (HR = 1.15 1.251.37 ), cigarette use (HR = 1.09 1.161.23 ), as well as ABO incompatibility (HR = 1.03 1.271.58 ), HLA B (HR = 1.03 1.081.14 ) mismatches, and DR (HR = 1.04 1.091.15 ) mismatches were associated with greater risk of graft loss after living donor transplantation (all p < 0.05). Median (interquartile range) LKDPI score was 13 (1-27); 24.2% of donors had LKDPI < 0 (less risk than any DD kidney), and 4.4% of donors had LKDPI > 50 (more risk than the median DD kidney). The LKDPI is a useful tool for comparing living donor kidneys to each other and to deceased donor kidneys.


Subject(s)
Clinical Decision-Making , Graft Rejection/epidemiology , Kidney Failure, Chronic/surgery , Kidney Transplantation , Living Donors , Risk Assessment/methods , Adult , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Glomerular Filtration Rate , Graft Survival , Humans , Kidney Function Tests , Male , Middle Aged , Prognosis , United States/epidemiology
3.
Am J Transplant ; 15(12): 3215-23, 2015 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26018059

ABSTRACT

Deceased donors are labeled increased risk for disease transmission (IRD) if they meet certain criteria. New PHS guidelines were recently implemented; the impact of these changes remains unknown. We aimed to quantify the impact of the new guidelines on the proportion of deceased donors labeled IRD, as well as demographic and clinical characteristics. We used Poisson regression with an interaction term for era (new vs. old guidelines) to quantify changes. Under the new guidelines, 19.5% donors were labeled IRD, compared to 10.4%, 12.2%, and 12.3% in the 3 most recent years under the old guidelines (IRR = 1.45, p < 0.001). Increases were consistent across OPOs: 44/59 had an increase in the percent of donors labeled IRD, and 14 OPOs labeled 25% of their donors IRD under the new guidelines (vs. 5 OPOs under the old). African-Americans were 52% more likely to be labeled IRD under the new guidelines (RR = 1.52, p = 0.01). There has been a substantial increase in donors labeled IRD under the new PHS guidelines; it is important to understand the mechanism and consequences to ensure an optimal balance of patient safety and organ utilization is achieved.


Subject(s)
Disease Transmission, Infectious/prevention & control , Donor Selection , Organ Transplantation/standards , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Tissue Donors , Tissue and Organ Harvesting/standards , Adolescent , Adult , Cadaver , Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. , Child , Child, Preschool , Female , Health Care Surveys , Humans , Infant , Male , Middle Aged , Prognosis , United States , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL