Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 5 de 5
Filtrar
1.
Transplantation ; 105(2): 436-442, 2021 02 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32235255

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Desensitization protocols for HLA-incompatible living donor kidney transplantation (ILDKT) vary across centers. The impact of these, as well as other practice variations, on ILDKT outcomes remains unknown. METHODS: We sought to quantify center-level variation in mortality and graft loss following ILDKT using a 25-center cohort of 1358 ILDKT recipients with linkage to Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients for accurate outcome ascertainment. We used multilevel Cox regression with shared frailty to determine the variation in post-ILDKT outcomes attributable to between-center differences and to identify any center-level characteristics associated with improved post-ILDKT outcomes. RESULTS: After adjusting for patient-level characteristics, only 6 centers (24%) had lower mortality and 1 (4%) had higher mortality than average. Similarly, only 5 centers (20%) had higher graft loss and 2 had lower graft loss than average. Only 4.7% of the differences in mortality (P < 0.01) and 4.4% of the differences in graft loss (P < 0.01) were attributable to between-center variation. These translated to a median hazard ratio of 1.36 for mortality and 1.34 of graft loss for similar candidates at different centers. Post-ILDKT outcomes were not associated with the following center-level characteristics: ILDKT volume and transplanting a higher proportion of highly sensitized, prior transplant, preemptive, or minority candidates. CONCLUSIONS: Unlike most aspects of transplantation in which center-level variation and volume impact outcomes, we did not find substantial evidence for this in ILDKT. Our findings support the continued practice of ILDKT across these diverse centers.


Assuntos
Rejeição de Enxerto/prevenção & controle , Sobrevivência de Enxerto/efeitos dos fármacos , Antígenos HLA/imunologia , Disparidades em Assistência à Saúde , Histocompatibilidade , Imunossupressores/uso terapêutico , Isoanticorpos/sangue , Transplante de Rim , Doadores Vivos , Padrões de Prática Médica , Adulto , Feminino , Rejeição de Enxerto/sangue , Rejeição de Enxerto/imunologia , Rejeição de Enxerto/mortalidade , Humanos , Imunossupressores/efeitos adversos , Transplante de Rim/efeitos adversos , Transplante de Rim/mortalidade , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Indicadores de Qualidade em Assistência à Saúde , Sistema de Registros , Medição de Risco , Fatores de Risco , Fatores de Tempo , Resultado do Tratamento , Estados Unidos
2.
Transplant Direct ; 6(9): e593, 2020 Sep.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32851126

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The Live Donor Champion (LDC) program trains kidney transplant (KT) candidates and their family/friends ("champions") as educator-advocates for live donor KT (LDKT). This program was created to empower patients and champions, particularly African American (AA) waitlist candidates that historically had lower access to LDKT. We assessed changes in knowledge about and comfort discussing live donation and donor referral associated with LDC participation, both overall and by participant race. METHODS: We compared 163 adult KT candidates who were LDC participants from October 2013 to May 2016 with 489 matched controls, both overall and by race. We compared changes in comfort and knowledge post-LDC using rank-sum tests among participants by race. We compared time to first live donor referral for participants versus controls, by race, using Cox regression. RESULTS: Post-LDC versus pre-LDC, participants had higher median knowledge (83% versus 63% on 12-question quiz; P < 0.001) and comfort (1.8 versus 1 on 4-point Likert scale; P < 0.001). Among participants, AAs had similar baseline and final knowledge (P = 0.9 and P = 0.1, respectively) and baseline comfort (P > 0.9) as non-AAs but higher final comfort (2 versus 1.4; P = 0.005) than non-AAs. LDC participants were 5.8 times as likely as controls to have a live donor referral (aHR 3.765.788.89; P < 0.001); the impact of LDC participation was similar among non-AAs and AAs (p-interaction = 0.6). CONCLUSIONS: The LDC program increased knowledge, comfort, and live donor referral for non-AA and AA participants, underscoring the effectiveness in the program in promoting LDKT in a population with historically lower access to LDKT.

3.
Am J Transplant ; 19(2): 564-572, 2019 02.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30312530

RESUMO

Historically, exception points for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) led to higher transplant rates and lower waitlist mortality for HCC candidates compared to non-HCC candidates. As of October 2015, HCC candidates must wait 6 months after initial application to obtain exception points; the impact of this policy remains unstudied. Using 2013-2017 SRTR data, we identified 39  350 adult, first-time, active waitlist candidates and compared deceased donor liver transplant (DDLT) rates and waitlist mortality/dropout for HCC versus non-HCC candidates before (October 8, 2013-October 7, 2015, prepolicy) and after (October 8, 2015-October 7, 2017, postpolicy) the policy change using Cox and competing risks regression, respectively. Compared to non-HCC candidates with the same calculated MELD, HCC candidates had a 3.6-fold higher rate of DDLT prepolicy (aHR = 3.49 3.69 3.89 ) and a 2.2-fold higher rate of DDLT postpolicy (aHR = 2.09 2.21 2.34 ). Compared to non-HCC candidates with the same allocation priority, HCC candidates had a 37% lower risk of waitlist mortality/dropout prepolicy (asHR = 0.54 0.63 0.73 ) and a comparable risk of mortality/dropout postpolicy (asHR = 0.81 0.95 1.11 ). Following the policy change, the DDLT advantage for HCC candidates remained, albeit dramatically attenuated, without any substantial increase in waitlist mortality/dropout. In the context of sickest-first liver allocation, the revised policy seems to have established allocation equity for HCC and non-HCC candidates.


Assuntos
Carcinoma Hepatocelular/mortalidade , Neoplasias Hepáticas/mortalidade , Transplante de Fígado/mortalidade , Seleção de Pacientes , Alocação de Recursos/legislação & jurisprudência , Obtenção de Tecidos e Órgãos/estatística & dados numéricos , Listas de Espera/mortalidade , Idoso , Carcinoma Hepatocelular/patologia , Carcinoma Hepatocelular/cirurgia , Feminino , Seguimentos , Humanos , Neoplasias Hepáticas/patologia , Neoplasias Hepáticas/cirurgia , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Prognóstico , Estudos Prospectivos , Medição de Risco , Índice de Gravidade de Doença , Doadores de Tecidos
4.
Am J Transplant ; 18(6): 1415-1423, 2018 06.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29232040

RESUMO

The Kidney Allocation System fundamentally altered kidney allocation, causing a substantial increase in regional and national sharing that we hypothesized might impact geographic disparities. We measured geographic disparity in deceased donor kidney transplant (DDKT) rate under KAS (6/1/2015-12/1/2016), and compared that with pre-KAS (6/1/2013-12/3/2014). We modeled DSA-level DDKT rates with multilevel Poisson regression, adjusting for allocation factors under KAS. Using the model we calculated a novel, improved metric of geographic disparity: the median incidence rate ratio (MIRR) of transplant rate, a measure of DSA-level variation that accounts for patient casemix and is robust to outlier values. Under KAS, MIRR was 1.75 1.811.86 for adults, meaning that similar candidates across different DSAs have a median 1.81-fold difference in DDKT rate. The impact of geography was greater than the impact of factors emphasized by KAS: having an EPTS score ≤20% was associated with a 1.40-fold increase (IRR = 1.35 1.401.45 , P < .01) and a three-year dialysis vintage was associated with a 1.57-fold increase (IRR = 1.56 1.571.59 , P < .001) in transplant rate. For pediatric candidates, MIRR was even more pronounced, at 1.66 1.922.27 . There was no change in geographic disparities with KAS (P = .3). Despite extensive changes to kidney allocation under KAS, geography remains a primary determinant of access to DDKT.


Assuntos
Geografia , Alocação de Recursos para a Atenção à Saúde , Transplante de Rim , Obtenção de Tecidos e Órgãos , Adulto , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Distribuição de Poisson , Diálise Renal
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA