Safety of Kidney Transplantation from Donors with HIV.

BACKGROUND: Kidney transplantation from donors with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) to recipients with HIV is an emerging practice. It has been performed since 2016 under the U.S. congressional HIV Organ Policy Equity Act and is currently approved for research only. The Department of Health and Human Services is considering expanding the procedure to clinical practice, but data are limited to small case series that did not include donors without HIV as controls. METHODS: In an observational study conducted at 26 U.S. centers, we compared transplantation of kidneys from deceased donors with HIV and donors without HIV to recipients with HIV. The primary outcome was a safety event (a composite of death from any cause, graft loss, serious adverse event, HIV breakthrough infection, persistent failure of HIV treatment, or opportunistic infection), assessed for noninferiority (margin for the upper bound of the 95% confidence interval, 3.00). Secondary outcomes included overall survival, survival without graft loss, rejection, infection, cancer, and HIV superinfection. RESULTS: We enrolled 408 transplantation candidates, of whom 198 received a kidney from a deceased donor; 99 received a kidney from a donor with HIV and 99 from a donor without HIV. The adjusted hazard ratio for the composite primary outcome was 1.00 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73 to 1.38), which showed noninferiority. The following secondary outcomes were similar whether the donor had HIV or not: overall survival at 1 year (94% vs. 95%) and 3 years (85% vs. 87%), survival without graft loss at 1 year (93% vs. 90%) and 3 years (84% vs. 81%), and rejection at 1 year (13% vs. 21%) and 3 years (21% vs. 24%). The incidence of serious adverse events, infections, surgical or vascular complications, and cancer was similar in the groups. The incidence of HIV breakthrough infection was higher among recipients of kidneys from donors with HIV (incidence rate ratio, 3.14; 95%, CI, 1.02 to 9.63), with one potential HIV superinfection among the 58 recipients in this group with sequence data and no persistent failures of HIV treatment. CONCLUSIONS: In this observational study of kidney transplantation in persons with HIV, transplantation from donors with HIV appeared to be noninferior to that from donors without HIV. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03500315.).

Liver transplantation: from inception to clinical practice.

The 2012 Lasker-DeBakey Clinical Medical Research Award will be conferred on Thomas Starzl of the University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA and Roy Calne of the University of Cambridge in Cambridge, UK. They are recognized for pioneering the development of liver transplantation, an intervention that saves 20,000 lives world-wide each year.

Transplantation Outcomes with Donor Hearts after Circulatory Death.

BACKGROUND: Data showing the efficacy and safety of the transplantation of hearts obtained from donors after circulatory death as compared with hearts obtained from donors after brain death are limited. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, noninferiority trial in which adult candidates for heart transplantation were assigned in a 3:1 ratio to receive a heart after the circulatory death of the donor or a heart from a donor after brain death if that heart was available first (circulatory-death group) or to receive only a heart that had been preserved with the use of traditional cold storage after the brain death of the donor (brain-death group). The primary end point was the risk-adjusted survival at 6 months in the as-treated circulatory-death group as compared with the brain-death group. The primary safety end point was serious adverse events associated with the heart graft at 30 days after transplantation. RESULTS: A total of 180 patients underwent transplantation; 90 (assigned to the circulatory-death group) received a heart donated after circulatory death and 90 (regardless of group assignment) received a heart donated after brain death. A total of 166 transplant recipients were included in the as-treated primary analysis (80 who received a heart from a circulatory-death donor and 86 who received a heart from a brain-death donor). The risk-adjusted 6-month survival in the as-treated population was 94% (95% confidence interval [CI], 88 to 99) among recipients of a heart from a circulatory-death donor, as compared with 90% (95% CI, 84 to 97) among recipients of a heart from a brain-death donor (least-squares mean difference, -3 percentage points; 90% CI, -10 to 3; P<0.001 for noninferiority [margin, 20 percentage points]). There were no substantial between-group differences in the mean per-patient number of serious adverse events associated with the heart graft at 30 days after transplantation. CONCLUSIONS: In this trial, risk-adjusted survival at 6 months after transplantation with a donor heart that had been reanimated and assessed with the use of extracorporeal nonischemic perfusion after circulatory death was not inferior to that after standard-care transplantation with a donor heart that had been preserved with the use of cold storage after brain death. (Funded by TransMedics; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03831048.).

Intravenous Levothyroxine for Unstable Brain-Dead Heart Donors.

BACKGROUND: Hemodynamic instability and myocardial dysfunction are major factors preventing the transplantation of hearts from organ donors after brain death. Intravenous levothyroxine is widely used in donor care, on the basis of observational data suggesting that more organs may be transplanted from donors who receive hormonal supplementation. METHODS: In this trial involving 15 organ-procurement organizations in the United States, we randomly assigned hemodynamically unstable potential heart donors within 24 hours after declaration of death according to neurologic criteria to open-label infusion of intravenous levothyroxine (30 µg per hour for a minimum of 12 hours) or saline placebo. The primary outcome was transplantation of the donor heart; graft survival at 30 days after transplantation was a prespecified recipient safety outcome. Secondary outcomes included weaning from vasopressor therapy, donor ejection fraction, and number of organs transplanted per donor. RESULTS: Of the 852 brain-dead donors who underwent randomization, 838 were included in the primary analysis: 419 in the levothyroxine group and 419 in the saline group. Hearts were transplanted from 230 donors (54.9%) in the levothyroxine group and 223 (53.2%) in the saline group (adjusted risk ratio, 1.01; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.97 to 1.07; P = 0.57). Graft survival at 30 days occurred in 224 hearts (97.4%) transplanted from donors assigned to receive levothyroxine and 213 hearts (95.5%) transplanted from donors assigned to receive saline (difference, 1.9 percentage points; 95% CI, -2.3 to 6.0; P<0.001 for noninferiority at a margin of 6 percentage points). There were no substantial between-group differences in weaning from vasopressor therapy, ejection fraction on echocardiography, or organs transplanted per donor, but more cases of severe hypertension and tachycardia occurred in the levothyroxine group than in the saline group. CONCLUSIONS: In hemodynamically unstable brain-dead potential heart donors, intravenous levothyroxine infusion did not result in significantly more hearts being transplanted than saline infusion. (Funded by Mid-America Transplant and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04415658.).

The future of liver transplantation.

Over the last 50 years, liver transplantation has evolved into a procedure routinely performed in many countries worldwide. Those able to access this therapy frequently experience a miraculous risk-benefit ratio, particularly if they face the imminently life-threatening disease. Over the decades, the success of liver transplantation, with dramatic improvements in early posttransplant survival, has aggressively driven demand. However, despite the emergence of living donors to augment deceased donors as a source of organs, supply has lagged far behind demand. As a result, rationing has been an unfortunate focus in recent decades. Recent shifts in the epidemiology of liver disease combined with transformative innovations in liver preservation suggest that the underlying premise of organ shortage may erode in the foreseeable future. The focus will sharpen on improving equitable access while mitigating constraints related to workforce training, infrastructure for organ recovery and rehabilitation, and their associated costs. Research efforts in liver preservation will undoubtedly blossom with the aim of optimizing both the timing and conditions of transplantation. Coupled with advances in genetic engineering, regenerative biology, and cellular therapies, the portfolio of innovation, both broad and deep, offers the promise that, in the future, liver transplantation will not only be broadly available to those in need but also represent a highly durable life-saving therapy.

Beyond the Final Heartbeat: Neurological Perspectives on Normothermic Regional Perfusion for Organ Donation after Circulatory Death.

Normothermic regional perfusion (NRP) has recently been used to augment organ donation after circulatory death (DCD) to improve the quantity and quality of transplantable organs. In DCD-NRP, after withdrawal of life-sustaining therapies and cardiopulmonary arrest, patients are cannulated onto extracorporeal membrane oxygenation to reestablish blood flow to targeted organs including the heart. During this process, aortic arch vessels are ligated to restrict cerebral blood flow. We review ethical challenges including whether the brain is sufficiently reperfused through collateral circulation to allow reemergence of consciousness or pain perception, whether resumption of cardiac activity nullifies the patient's prior death determination, and whether specific authorization for DCD-NRP is required. ANN NEUROL 2024;95:1035-1039.

Organ Donation After Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: A Scientific Statement From the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation.

AIM OF THE REVIEW: Improving rates of organ donation among patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest who do not survive is an opportunity to save countless lives. The objectives of this scientific statement were to do the following: define the opportunity for organ donation among patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest; identify challenges and opportunities associated with organ donation by patients with cardiac arrest; identify strategies, including a generic protocol for organ donation after cardiac arrest, to increase the rate and consistency of organ donation from this population; and provide rationale for including organ donation as a key clinical outcome for all future cardiac arrest clinical trials and registries. METHODS: The scope of this International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation scientific statement was approved by the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation board and the American Heart Association, posted on ILCOR.org for public comment, and then assigned by section to primary and secondary authors. A unique literature search was completed and updated for each section. RESULTS: There are a number of defining pathways for patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest to become organ donors; however, modifications in the Maastricht classification system need to be made to correctly identify these donors and to report outcomes with consistency. Suggested modifications to the minimum data set for reporting cardiac arrests will increase reporting of organ donation as an important resuscitation outcome. There are a number of challenges with implementing uncontrolled donation after cardiac death protocols, and the greatest impediment is the lack of legislation in most countries to mandate organ donation as the default option. Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation has the potential to increase organ donation rates, but more research is needed to derive neuroprognostication rules to guide clinical decision-making about when to stop extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation and to evaluate cost-effectiveness. CONCLUSIONS: All health systems should develop, implement, and evaluate protocols designed to optimize organ donation opportunities for patients who have an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest and failed attempts at resuscitation.

A large-scale retrospective study enabled deep-learning based pathological assessment of frozen procurement kidney biopsies to predict graft loss and guide organ utilization.

Lesion scores on procurement donor biopsies are commonly used to guide organ utilization for deceased-donor kidneys. However, frozen sections present challenges for histological scoring, leading to inter- and intra-observer variability and inappropriate discard. Therefore, we constructed deep-learning based models to recognize kidney tissue compartments in hematoxylin & eosin-stained sections from procurement needle biopsies performed nationwide in years 2011-2020. To do this, we extracted whole-slide abnormality features from 2431 kidneys and correlated with pathologists' scores and transplant outcomes. A Kidney Donor Quality Score (KDQS) was derived and used in combination with recipient demographic and peri-transplant characteristics to predict graft loss or assist organ utilization. The performance on wedge biopsies was additionally evaluated. Our model identified 96% and 91% of normal/sclerotic glomeruli respectively; 94% of arteries/arterial intimal fibrosis; 90% of tubules. Whole-slide features of Sclerotic Glomeruli (GS)%, Arterial Intimal Fibrosis (AIF)%, and Interstitial Space Abnormality (ISA)% demonstrated strong correlations with corresponding pathologists' scores of all 2431 kidneys, but had superior associations with post-transplant estimated glomerular filtration rates in 2033 and graft loss in 1560 kidneys. The combination of KDQS and other factors predicted one- and four-year graft loss in a discovery set of 520 kidneys and a validation set of 1040 kidneys. By using the composite KDQS of 398 discarded kidneys due to "biopsy findings", we suggest that if transplanted, 110 discarded kidneys could have had similar survival to that of other transplanted kidneys. Thus, our composite KDQS and survival prediction models may facilitate risk stratification and organ utilization while potentially reducing unnecessary organ discard.

Improving frozen section evaluation of procurement donor kidney biopsies and reducing the discard rate: a promising role for artificial intelligence.

There is a worldwide shortage of deceased-donor kidneys available for transplantation, with too many patients dying while on waiting lists for organs. Meanwhile, and particularly in the United States, many recovered kidneys are discarded, often based on results of frozen section evaluation of a screening biopsy read by an on-call pathologist with limited renal pathology experience. A study in this month's issue of Kidney International uses an artificial intelligence-based approach to evaluate these biopsies, which not only improved correlation between biopsy findings and short-to-intermediate term graft survival, but also demonstrated the potential to reduce biopsy-associated organ discard rates by 25% to 30%.

Temporal trends in kidney paired donation in the United States: 2006-2021 UNOS/OPTN database analysis.

Kidney paired donation (KPD) is a major innovation that is changing the landscape of kidney transplantation in the United States. We used the 2006-2021 United Network for Organ Sharing data to examine trends over time. KPD is increasing, with 1 in 5 living donor kidney transplants (LDKTs) in 2021 facilitated by KPD. The proportion of LDKT performed via KPD was comparable for non-Whites and Whites. An increasing proportion of KPD transplants are going to non-Whites. End-chain recipients are not identified in the database. To what extent these trends reflect how end-chain kidneys are allocated, as opposed to increase in living donation among minorities, remains unclear. Half the LDKT in 2021 in sensitized (panel reactive antibody ≥ 80%) and highly sensitized (panel reactive antibody ≥ 98%) groups occurred via KPD. Yet, the proportion of KPD transplants performed in sensitized recipients has declined since 2013, likely due to changes in the deceased donor allocation policies and newer KPD strategies such as compatible KPD. In 2021, 40% of the programs reported not performing any KPD transplants. Our study highlights the need for understanding barriers to pursuing and expanding KPD at the center level and the need for more detailed and accurate data collection at the national level.

Financial toxicity in living donor liver transplantation: A call to action for financial neutrality.

After 2 decades of limited growth, living donor liver transplant (LDLT) has been increasingly accepted as a promising solution to the growing organ shortage in the US. With experience, LDLT offers superior graft and patient survival with low rates of rejection. However, not all waitlisted patients have equal access to LDLT, with financial toxicity representing a substantial barrier. Potential living liver donors face indirect, direct, and opportunity costs associated with donation as well as insurance-based discrimination and variable employer leave policies. There are multiple potential national, local, and patient-centered solutions to address some of the cost-related issues associated with living LDLT. These include standardization of employer leave policies, creation of federal and state-led tax relief programs, optimization of National Living Donor Assistance Center use, engagement of independent living donor advocates, creation of financial toolkits, and encouragement of recipient or donor-led fundraising. In this piece, members of the North American Living Liver Donation Group, a consortium of 37 LDLT programs, explore these financial challenges and discuss solutions to achieve financial neutrality, where individuals can donate free from financial constraints or gains. As a community, it is imperative that we confront factors driving financial toxicity to improve equity and access to LDLT.

Common definitions and variables are needed for the United States to join the conversation on acute-on-chronic liver failure.

Acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) is a variably defined syndrome characterized by acute decompensation of cirrhosis with organ failures. At least 13 different definitions and diagnostic criteria for ACLF have been proposed, and there is increasing recognition that patients with ACLF may face disadvantages in the current United States liver allocation system. There is a need, therefore, for more standardized data collection and consensus to improve study design and outcome assessment in ACLF. In this article, we discuss the current landscape of transplantation for patients with ACLF, strategies to optimize organ utility, and data opportunities based on emerging technologies to facilitate improved data collection.

OPTN/SRTR 2022 Annual Data Report: Introduction.

The OPTN/SRTR 2022 Annual Data Report presents the status of the solid organ transplant system in the United States from 2011 through 2022. Organ-specific chapters are presented for kidney, pancreas, liver, intestine, heart, and lung transplant. Each organ-specific chapter is organized to present waitlist information, donor information (both deceased and living, as appropriate), transplant information, and patient outcomes. Data pertaining to pediatric patients are generally presented separately from the adult data. In addition to the organ-specific chapters, the reader will find chapters dedicated to deceased organ donation, vascularized composite allografts, and the COVID-19 pandemic. The data presented in the Annual Data Report are descriptive in nature. In other words, most tables and figures present raw data without statistical adjustment for possible confounding or changes over time. Therefore, the reader should keep in mind the observational nature of the data when attempting to draw inferences before trying to ascribe a cause to any observed patterns or trends. This introduction provides a brief overview of trends in waitlist and transplant activity from 2012 through 2022. More detailed descriptions can be found in the respective organ-specific chapters.

OPTN/SRTR 2022 Annual Data Report: Deceased Organ Donation.

The Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients uses data collected by the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network to calculate metrics such as organs recovered per donor, organs transplanted per donor, and organs recovered for transplant but not transplanted (ie, nonuse). In 2022, there were 14,905 deceased donors, a 7.5% increase from 13,863 in 2021, and this number has been increasing since 2010. The number of deceased donor organs used for transplant increased to 37,334 in 2022, a 4.6% increase from 35,687 in 2021; this number has been increasing since 2012. The increase may be due in part to the rising number of deaths of young people amid the ongoing opioid epidemic. The number of organs transplanted included 10,130 left kidneys, 10,039 right kidneys, 298 en bloc kidneys, 922 pancreata, 8,847 livers, 83 intestines, 4,169 hearts, and 2,633 lungs. Compared with 2021, transplants of all organs except pancreata and intestines increased in 2022. In 2022, 3,563 left kidneys, 3,673 right kidneys, 156 en bloc kidneys, 366 pancreata, 965 livers, 4 intestines, 54 hearts, and 219 lungs were not used. These data suggest an opportunity to increase the number of transplants by reducing the number of unused organs. Despite the COVID-19 pandemic, there was no dramatic increase in the number of unused organs and there was an increase in the total numbers of donors and transplants.

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.

Should advanced perfusion be the standard of care for donation after circulatory death liver transplant?

As an alternative to static cold storage (SCS), advanced perfusion techniques such as normothermic regional perfusion and ex-situ perfusion (normothermic or hypothermic) have emerged as a way to improve the ischemic injury suffered by donation after circulatory death (DCD) livers. Multiple studies have been published that have demonstrated superior post-DCD liver transplant outcomes when using advanced perfusion compared with SCS. In particular, these studies have shown lower rates of ischemic cholangiopathy with advanced perfusion. In addition to the improved post-liver transplant outcomes, studies have also demonstrated higher rates of liver utilization from DCD donors when advanced perfusion is used compared with SCS. Given the high rates of graft loss in patients who develop ischemic cholangiopathy, the significant reduction seen in DCD donor livers that have undergone advanced perfusion represents a key step in more broad utilization of these livers. With such compelling evidence from multiple trials, it seems reasonable to ask the question: should advanced perfusion be the standard of care for DCD liver transplant?

Donor utilization in heart transplant with donation after circulatory death in the United States.

Heart transplantation using donation after circulatory death (DCD) was recently adopted in the United States. This study aimed to characterize organ yield from adult (≥18 years) DCD heart donors in the United States using the United Network for Organ Sharing registry. The registry does not identify potential donors who do not progress to circulatory death, and only those who progressed to death were included for analysis. Outcomes included organ recovery from the donor operating room and organ utilization for transplant. Multiple logistic regression was used to identify predictors of heart recovery and utilization. Among 558 DCD procurements, recovery occurred in 89.6%, and 92.5% of recovered hearts were utilized for transplant. Of 506 DCD procurements with available data, 65.0% were classified as direct procurement and perfusion and 35.0% were classified as normothermic regional perfusion (NRP). Logistic regression identified that NRP, shorter agonal time, younger donor age, and highest volume of organ procurement organizations were independently associated with increased odds for heart recovery. NRP independently predicted heart utilization after recovery. DCD heart utilization in the United States is satisfactory and consistent with international experience. NRP procurements have a higher yield for DCD heart transplantation compared with direct procurement and perfusion, which may reflect differences in donor assessment and acceptance criteria.

Sexual and gender minority relevant policies in Canadian and United States organ and tissue donation and transplantation systems: An opportunity to improve equity and safety.

Current policies in organ and tissue donation and transplantation (OTDT) systems in Canada and the United States unnecessarily restrict access to donation for sexual and gender minorities (SGMs) and pose safety risks to transplant recipients. We compare SGM-relevant policies between the Canadian and United States systems. Policy domains include the risk assessment of living and deceased organ and tissue donors, physical examination considerations, viral testing recommendations, and informed consent and communication. Identified gaps between current evidence and existing OTDT policies along with differences in SGM-relevant policies between systems, represent an opportunity for improvement. Specific recommendations for OTDT system policy revisions to achieve these goals include the development of behavior-based, gender-neutral risk assessment criteria, a reduction in current SGM no-sexual contact period requirements pending development of inclusive criteria, and destigmatization of sexual contact with people living with human immunodeficiency virus. OTDT systems should avoid rectal examinations to screen for evidence of receptive anal sex without consent and mandate routine nucleic acid amplification test screening for all donors. Transplant recipients must receive enhanced risk-to-benefit discussions regarding decisions to accept or decline an offer of an organ classified as increased risk. These recommendations will expand the donor pool, enhance equity for SGM people, and improve safety and outcomes for transplant recipients.

Maintaining the permanence principle of death during normothermic regional perfusion in controlled donation after the circulatory determination of death: Results of a prospective clinical study.

One concern about the use of normothermic regional perfusion (NRP) in controlled donation after the circulatory determination of death (cDCD) is that the brain may be perfused. We aimed to demonstrate that certain technical maneuvers preclude such brain perfusion. A nonrandomized trial was performed on cDCD donors. In abdominal normothermic regional perfusion (A-NRP), the thoracic aorta was blocked with an intra-aortic occlusion balloon. In thoracoabdominal normothermic regional perfusion (TA-NRP), the arch vessels were clamped and the cephalad ends vented to the atmosphere. The mean intracranial arterial blood pressure (ICBP) was invasively measured at the circle of Willis. Ten cDCD donors subject to A-NRP or TA-NRP were included. Mean ICBP and mean blood pressure at the thoracic and the abdominal aorta during the circulatory arrest were 17 (standard deviation [SD], 3), 17 (SD, 3), and 18 (SD, 4) mmHg, respectively. When A-NRP started, pressure at the abdominal aorta increased to 50 (SD, 13) mmHg, while the ICBP remained unchanged. When TA-NRP was initiated, thoracic aorta pressure increased to 71 (SD, 18) mmHg, but the ICBP remained unmodified. Recorded values of ICBP during NRP were 10 mmHg. In conclusion, appropriate technical measures applied during NRP preclude perfusion of the brain in cDCD. This study might help to expand NRP and increase the number of organs available for transplantation.

Impact of simultaneous heart procurement on outcomes of donation after circulatory death lung transplantation.

Donation after circulatory death (DCD) heart procurement is done using either direct procurement (DP) or thoracoabdominal normothermic machine perfusion (TA-NRP). Both approaches could impact lung transplant outcomes with combined heart and lung procurements from the same donor. The impact of such practice on DCD lung transplant remains unstudied. We performed a retrospective analysis using the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) dataset, identifying DCD lung transplants where the donor also donated the heart (cardia lung donor [CD]). A cohort of noncardiac DCD lung donors (noncardiac lung donor [NCD]) from the same era, matched for donor and recipient characteristics, was used as a comparison group. Both immediate and long-term outcomes were examined. A subanalysis was performed comparing the distinct impact of DP or TA-NRP on DCD lung transplant outcomes. Overall graft survival did not significantly differ between CD and NCD. However, recipients in the CD group trended toward a lower P/F ratio at 72 hours (CD vs NCD: 284 vs 3190; P = .054). In the subanalysis, we identified 40 DP donors and 22 TA-NRP donors. We found the both cohorts had lower P/F ratio at 72 hours than the NCD control (P = .04). Overall, 1-year graft survival was equivalent among the TA-NRP, DP, and NCD cohorts.