Banff 2022 pancreas transplantation multidisciplinary report: Refinement of guidelines for T cell-mediated rejection, antibody-mediated rejection and islet pathology. Assessment of duodenal cuff biopsies and noninvasive diagnostic methods.

The Banff pancreas working schema for diagnosis and grading of rejection is widely used for treatment guidance and risk stratification in centers that perform pancreas allograft biopsies. Since the last update, various studies have provided additional insight regarding the application of the schema and enhanced our understanding of additional clinicopathologic entities. This update aims to clarify terminology and lesion description for T cell-mediated and antibody-mediated allograft rejections, in both active and chronic forms. In addition, morphologic and immunohistochemical tools are described to help distinguish rejection from nonrejection pathologies. For the first time, a clinicopathologic approach to islet pathology in the early and late posttransplant periods is discussed. This update also includes a discussion and recommendations on the utilization of endoscopic duodenal donor cuff biopsies as surrogates for pancreas biopsies in various clinical settings. Finally, an analysis and recommendations on the use of donor-derived cell-free DNA for monitoring pancreas graft recipients are provided. This multidisciplinary effort assesses the current role of pancreas allograft biopsies and offers practical guidelines that can be helpful to pancreas transplant practitioners as well as experienced pathologists and pathologists in training.

Black and hispanic patients with movement disorders less likely to undergo deep brain stimulation.

BACKGROUND: DBS is an effective surgical treatment for ET, PD, and dystonia. Racial disparities in DBS utilization in PD have been documented demonstrating that Black patients receive DBS at lower rates than White patients. To our knowledge, no studies have investigated if this pattern of non-use persists in other movement disorders with FDA-approval. OBJECTIVE: To identify racial and ethnic disparities in DBS utilization in those hospitalized for ET, PD, and dystonia. METHODS: The NIS database was queried for US hospitalizations from 2012 to 2018 with a primary diagnosis of ET, PD, or dystonia, and a total of 3,363, 21,963, and 1,835 discharges were recorded, respectively. Within that sample, treatment with DBS was identified. Sex, race, age, payment method, income quartile, year, mortality risk, hospital size, urban/rural setting, teaching status, and geographic region were extracted. A multivariate logistic regression was performed to identify predictors for use and non-use of DBS. RESULTS: Between 2012 and 2018, Black patients with PD, ET, and dystonia were less likely to receive DBS than White patients. Black patients with PD were 7 times less likely to receive DBS (OR = 0.145, CI = 0.111-0.189), and Black patients with ET and dystonia were 5 times less likely to receive DBS than White patients (OR = 0.188, CI = 0.124-0.285; OR = 0.186, CI = 0.084-0.414). Compared to White patients, Hispanic patients with PD (OR = 0.631, OR = 0.539-0.740) and ET (OR = 0.438, CI = 0.277-0.695) were less likely to undergo DBS. When controlling for patient and hospital level characteristics, racial and ethnic disparities remained. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that Black patients with a diagnosis of ET, PD, or dystonia and Hispanic patients with a diagnosis of ET or PD were less likely to be treated with DBS than White patients between 2012 and 2018.

User-Centered Mobile Applications for Stroke Survivors (MAPPS): A Mixed-Methods Study of Patient Preferences.

OBJECTIVE: Investigate stroke survivors' (SS) preferences for a hypothetical mHealth app for post-stroke care and to study the influence of demographic variables on these preferences. DESIGN: Mixed-methods, sequential, observational study. SETTING: Focus groups (phase 1) were conducted to identify SS perceptions and knowledge of mHealth applications (apps). Using grounded theory approach, recurring themes were identified. A multiple-choice questionnaire of 5 desired app features was generated using these themes and mailed to SS (national survey, phase 2). SS' demographics and perceived usefulness (yes/no) for each feature were recorded. In-person usability testing (phase 3) was conducted to identify areas of improvement in user interfaces of existing apps. Summative telephone interviews (phase 4) were conducted for final impressions supplementary to national survey. PARTICIPANTS: SS aged >18 years recruited from study hospital, national stroke association database, stroke support and advocacy groups. Non-English speakers and those unable to communicate were excluded. INTERVENTIONS: None. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: (1) Percentage of SS (phase 2) identifying proposed app features to be useful. (2) Influence of age, sex, race, education, and time since stroke on perceived usefulness. RESULTS: Ninety-six SS participated in focus groups. High cost, complexity, and lack of technical support were identified as barriers to adoption of mHealth apps. In the national survey (n=1194), ability to track fitness and diet (84%) and communication (70%) were the most and least useful features, respectively. Perceived usefulness was higher among younger SS (P<.001 to .006) and SS of color (African American and Hispanic) (ORs 1.73-4.41). Simple design and accommodation for neurologic deficits were main recommendations from usability testing. CONCLUSIONS: SS are willing to adopt mHealth apps that are free of cost and provide technical support. Apps for SS should perform multiple tasks and be of simple design. Greater interest for the app's features among SS of color may provide opportunities to address health inequities.

Illustration of Cost Saving Implications of Lower Extremity Nerve Decompression to Prevent Recurrence of Diabetic Foot Ulceration.

The US diabetic foot ulcer (DFU) incidence is 3-4% of 22.3 million diagnosed diabetes cases plus 6.3 million undiagnosed, 858 000 cases total. Risk of recurrence after healing is 30% annually. Lower extremity multiple nerve decompression (ND) surgery reduces neuropathic DFU (nDFU) recurrence risk by >80%. Cost effectiveness of hypothetical ND implementation to minimize nDFU recurrence is compared to the current $6.171 billion annual nDFU expense. A literature review identified best estimates of annual incidence, recurrence risk, medical management expense, and noneconomic costs for DFU. Illustrative cost/benefit calculations were performed assuming widespread application of bilateral ND after wound healing to the nDFU problem, using Center for Medicare Services mean expense data of $1143/case for unilateral lower extremity ND. Calculations use conservative, evidence-based cost figures, which are contemporary (2012) or adjusted for inflation. Widespread adoption of ND after nDFU healing could reduce annual DFU occurrences by at least 21% in the third year and 24% by year 5, representing calculated cost savings of $1.296 billion (year 3) to $1.481 billion (year 5). This scenario proffers significant expense reduction and societal benefit, and represents a minimum 1.9× return on the investment cost for surgical treatment. Further large cost savings would require reductions in initial DFU incidence, which ND might achieve by selective application to advanced diabetic sensorimotor polyneuropathy (DSPN). By minimizing the contribution of recurrences to yearly nDFU incidence, ND has potential to reduce by nearly $1 billion the annual cost of DFU treatment in the United States.

Survival benefit of solid-organ transplant in the United States.

IMPORTANCE: The field of transplantation has made tremendous progress since the first successful kidney transplant in 1954. OBJECTIVE: To determine the survival benefit of solid-organ transplant as recorded during a 25-year study period in the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) database and the Social Security Administration Death Master File. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: In this retrospective analysis of UNOS data for solid-organ transplant during a 25-year period (September 1, 1987, through December 31, 2012), we reviewed the records of 1,112,835 patients: 533,329 recipients who underwent a transplant and 579 506 patients who were placed on the waiting list but did not undergo a transplant. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was patient death while on the waiting list or after transplant. Kaplan-Meier survival functions were used for time-to-event analysis. RESULTS: We found that 2,270,859 life-years (2,150,200 life-years from the matched analysis) were saved to date during the 25 years of solid-organ transplant. A mean of 4.3 life-years were saved (observed to date) per solid-organ transplant recipient. Kidney transplant saved 1,372,969 life-years; liver transplant, 465,296 life-years; heart transplant, 269,715 life-years; lung transplant, 64,575 life-years; pancreas-kidney transplant, 79,198 life-years; pancreas transplant, 14,903 life-years; and intestine transplant, 4402 life-years. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Our analysis demonstrated that more than 2 million life-years were saved to date by solid-organ transplants during a 25-year study period. Transplants should be supported and organ donation encouraged.

Mortality assessment for pancreas transplants.

We determined and compared the mortality of pancreas transplant recipients and of patients on the pancreas waiting lists by using United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) and International Pancreas Transplant Registry (IPTR) data. From January 1, 1995, through May 31, 2003, a total of 12,478 patients were listed for a simultaneous pancreas-kidney (SPK) transplant; 2942 for a pancreas after (previous) kidney transplant (PAK); and 1207 for a pancreas transplant alone (PTA). In this retrospective observational cohort study, patients with multiple listings at different transplant centers and patients who changed transplant centers were counted only once. The Social Security Death Master File (SSDMF) and the UNOS kidney transplant database were used to update mortality information. By univariate analyses, 4-year patient survival rates on the waiting lists (vs. post-transplant), in the SPK category, were 58.7% (vs. 90.3%); in the PAK category, 81.7% (vs. 88.3%); and in the PTA category, 87.3% (vs. 90.5%). Up to one-third of recipient deaths after post-transplant day 90 were not related to the transplant procedure itself. Multivariate analyses showed that the overall mortality in all three categories was not increased after transplantation (for SPK recipients only, it was significantly decreased). In summary, the mortality for solitary pancreas transplant recipients is not higher than for wait-listed patients.