Robotic performance metrics model fellow proficiency in living donor nephrectomy.

We investigated the use of robotic objective performance metrics (OPM) to predict number of cases to proficiency and independence among abdominal transplant fellows performing robot-assisted donor nephrectomy (RDN). 101 RDNs were performed by 5 transplant fellows from September 2020 to October 2023. OPM included fellow percent active control time (%ACT) and handoff counts (HC). Proficiency was defined as ACT ≥ 80% and HC ≤ 2, and independence as ACT ≥ 99% and HC ≤ 1. Case number was significantly associated with increasing fellow %ACT, with proficiency estimated at 14 cases and independence at 32 cases (R2 = 0.56, p < 0.001). Similarly, case number was significantly associated with decreasing HC, with proficiency at 18 cases and independence at 33 cases (R2 = 0.29, p < 0.001). Case number was not associated with total active console time (p = 0.91). Patient demographics, operative characteristics, and outcomes were not associated with OPM, except for donor estimated blood loss (EBL), which positively correlated with HC. Abdominal transplant fellows demonstrated proficiency at 14-18 cases and independence at 32-33 cases. Total active console time remained unchanged, suggesting that increasing fellow autonomy does not impede operative efficiency. These findings may serve as a benchmark for training abdominal transplant surgery fellows independently and safely in RDN.

The impact of a dedicated operating room team on robotic transplant program growth and fellowship training.

INTRODUCTION: Despite considerable interest in robotic surgery, successful incorporation of robotics into transplant programs has been challenging. Lack of a dedicated OR team with expertise in both robotics and transplant is felt to be a major barrier. This paper assesses the impact of a dedicated robotic transplant team (DART) on program growth and fellowship training at one of the largest robotic transplant programs in North America. METHODS: This is a single center, retrospective review of all robotic operations performed on the transplant surgery service from October 2017 to October 2022. DART was incorporated in February 2020 and included transplant first assists (RFAs), scrub technologists and circulating nurses who received robotic training. Robotic experience before and after DART was compared to assess its impact on program growth and training. RESULTS: Four hundred and two robotic cases were performed by five transplant surgeons: 63 pre-DART and 339 post-DART. 40% of cases were transplant-related and 59.5%, HPB. There was a significant increase in case volume (2.5-10.6 cases/month, p < .0001) and complexity (36.5% vs. 70.3% high complexity cases, p < .0001) post-DART. RFA case coverage increased from 17% to 95%, and participation of transplant fellows as primary surgeons increased from 17% to 95% post-DART period (both p < .05). Conversion rates (9.5% vs. 4.1%) and room turn-around-times (TAT) (58.4 vs. 40.3 min) were lower post-DART (p < .05). There were no emergent conversions, conversions in transplant patients, or robot-related complications in either group. CONCLUSION: OR teams with expertise in robotics and transplant surgery can accelerate growth of robotic transplant programs while maintaining patient safety.

A novel assessment model for teaching robot-assisted living donor nephrectomy in abdominal transplant surgery fellowship.

BACKGROUND: An increasing number of transplant centers have adopted robot-assisted living donor nephrectomy. Thus, a transplant fellow assessment tool is needed for promoting operative independence in an objective and safe manner. METHODS: In this pilot study, data was prospectively collected on both fellow performance with focus on technique, efficiency, and communication ("overall RO-SCORE"), and operative steps ("operative steps RO-SCORE"). Robotic user performance metrics were analyzed from the da Vinci Xi system, including fellow percent active control time (ACT) and handoff counts. RESULTS: From July 2020 to February 2021, twenty-one robot-assisted donor nephrectomies were performed. In regression analysis, fellow performance (based on both RO-SCOREs and robot % ACT) was significantly associated with both time and case number, with time-to-independence modelled at 8.4-14.2 months, and case number-to-independence estimated at 15-22 cases. Robot user metrics provided valid objective measures alongside RO-SCOREs. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot study provides an effective assessment tool for promoting operative competency in robot-assisted donor nephrectomy among transplant fellows.

The learning curve of deceased donor liver transplant during fellowship training.

Liver transplantation (LT) is a complex operation that most transplant surgeons learn in fellowship. Training varies as there is lack of objective data that can be used to standardize teaching. We performed a retrospective review of our adult LT database with aim of looking at fellow's experience. Using American Society of Transplant Surgery cutoff of, at least 45 LT during fellowship, data for first 45 LT were compared to LT 45-90. Fellow's cases were also clustered in sequential groups of 15 LT and analyzed to estimate the learning curve (LC). Comparison of LT 1-45 with LT 46-90 showed significantly lower total operative times (TOT) (324 vs. 344 min) and warm ischemia times (WIT) (28 vs. 31 min) in the 45-90 group. Rates of biliary complications (23.8% vs. 16.4%) and bile leaks alone (10.3% vs. 5.5%) were significantly higher for first 45 LT. Analysis of fellows experience in sequential clusters of 15 LT showed decreasing TOT, WIT, biliary complications and rates of unplanned return to the OR with progression of fellowship. This study validates the current ASTS requirement of at least 45 LT. LC generated using these data can help individualize training and optimize outcomes through identification of areas in need of improvement.

Novel Method of Evaluating Liver Transplant Surgery Fellows Using Objective Measures of Operative Efficiency and Surgical Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: The majority of liver transplantations (LTs) in North America are performed by transplant surgery fellows with attending surgeon supervision. Although a strict case volume requirement is mandatory for graduating fellows, no guidelines exist on providing constructive feedback to trainees during fellowship. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective review of all adult LTs performed by abdominal transplant surgery fellows at a single American Society of Transplant Surgeons-accredited academic institution from 2005 to 2019 was conducted. Data from the most recent 5 fellows were averaged to generate reference learning curves for 8 variables representing operative efficiency (ie total operative time, warm ischemia time, and cold ischemia time) and surgical outcomes (ie intraoperative blood loss, unplanned return to the operating room, biliary complication, vascular complication, and patient/graft loss). Data for newer fellows were plotted against the reference curves at 3-month intervals to provide an objective assessment measure. RESULTS: Three hundred and fifty-two adult LTs were performed by 5 fellows during the study period. Mean patient age was 56 years; 67% were male; and mean Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score at transplantation was 22. For the 8 primary variables, mean values included the following: total operative time 330 minutes, warm ischemia time 28 minutes, cold ischemia time 288 minutes, intraoperative blood loss 1.59 L, biliary complication 19.6%, unplanned return to operating room 19.3%, and vascular complication 2.3%. A structure for feedback to fellows was developed using a printed report card and through in-person meetings with faculty at 3-month intervals. CONCLUSIONS: Comparative feedback using institution-specific reference curves can provide valuable objective data on progression of individual fellows. It can aid in the timely identification of areas in need of improvement, which enhances the quality of training and has the potential to improve patient care and transplantation outcomes.

Multicenter validation of the liver graft assessment following transplantation (L-GrAFT) score for assessment of early allograft dysfunction.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Early allograft dysfunction (EAD) following liver transplantation (LT) negatively impacts graft and patient outcomes. Previously we reported that the liver graft assessment following transplantation (L-GrAFT7) risk score was superior to binary EAD or the model for early allograft function (MEAF) score for estimating 3-month graft failure-free survival in a single-center derivation cohort. Herein, we sought to externally validate L-GrAFT7, and compare its prognostic performance to EAD and MEAF. METHODS: Accuracies of L-GrAFT7, EAD, and MEAF were compared in a 3-center US validation cohort (n = 3,201), and a Consortium for Organ Preservation in Europe (COPE) normothermic machine perfusion (NMP) trial cohort (n = 222); characteristics were compared to assess generalizability. RESULTS: Compared to the derivation cohort, patients in the validation and NMP trial cohort had lower recipient median MELD scores; were less likely to require pretransplant hospitalization, renal replacement therapy or mechanical ventilation; and had superior 1-year overall (90% and 95% vs. 84%) and graft failure-free (88% and 93% vs. 81%) survival, with a lower incidence of 3-month graft failure (7.4% and 4.0% vs. 11.1%; p <0.001 for all comparisons). Despite significant differences in cohort characteristics, L-GrAFT7 maintained an excellent validation AUROC of 0.78, significantly superior to binary EAD (AUROC 0.68, p = 0.001) and MEAF scores (AUROC 0.72, p <0.001). In post hoc analysis of the COPE NMP trial, the highest tertile of L-GrAFT7 was significantly associated with time to liver allograft (hazard ratio [HR] 2.17, p = 0.016), Clavien ≥IIIB (HR 2.60, p = 0.034) and ≥IVa (HR 4.99, p = 0.011) complications; post-LT length of hospitalization (p = 0.002); and renal replacement therapy (odds ratio 3.62, p = 0.016). CONCLUSIONS: We have validated the L-GrAFT7 risk score as a generalizable, highly accurate, individualized risk assessment of 3-month liver allograft failure that is superior to existing scores. L-GrAFT7 may standardize grading of early hepatic allograft function and serve as a clinical endpoint in translational studies (www.lgraft.com). LAY SUMMARY: Early allograft dysfunction negatively affects outcomes following liver transplantation. In independent multicenter US and European cohorts totaling 3,423 patients undergoing liver transplantation, the liver graft assessment following transplantation (L-GrAFT) risk score is validated as a superior measure of early allograft function that accurately discriminates 3-month graft failure-free survival and post-liver transplantation complications.

Assessment of Hepatic Arterial Infusion of Floxuridine in Combination With Systemic Gemcitabine and Oxaliplatin in Patients With Unresectable Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma: A Phase 2 Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Unresectable intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (IHC) carries a poor prognosis, with a median overall survival (OS) of 11 months. Hepatic arterial infusion (HAI) of high-dose chemotherapy may have potential benefit in these patients. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate clinical outcomes when HAI chemotherapy is combined with systemic chemotherapy in patients with unresectable IHC. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A single-institution, phase 2 clinical trial including 38 patients was conducted with HAI floxuridine plus systemic gemcitabine and oxaliplatin in patients with unresectable IHC at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center between May 20, 2013, and June 27, 2019. A confirmatory phase 1/2 study using the same therapy was conducted during the same time period at Washington University in St Louis. Patients with histologically confirmed, unresectable IHC were eligible. Resectable metastatic disease to regional lymph nodes and prior systemic therapy were permitted. Patients with distant metastatic disease were excluded. INTERVENTIONS: Hepatic arterial infusion of floxuridine and systemic administration of gemcitabine and oxaliplatin. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was progression-free survival (PFS) of 80% at 6 months. RESULTS: For the phase 2 clinical trial at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 42 patients with unresectable IHC were included and, of these, 38 patients were treated (13 [34%] men; median [range] age at diagnosis, 64 [39-81] years). The median follow-up was 30.5 months. Twenty-two patients (58%) achieved a partial radiographic response, and 32 patients (84%) achieved disease control at 6 months. Four patients had sufficient response to undergo resection, and 1 patient had a complete pathologic response. The median PFS was 11.8 months (1-sided 90% CI, 11.1) with a 6-month PFS rate of 84.1% (90% CI, 74.8%-infinity), thereby meeting the primary end point (6-month PFS rate, 80%). The median OS was 25.0 months (95% CI, 20.6-not reached), and the 1-year OS rate was 89.5% (95% CI, 80.2%-99.8%). Patients with resectable regional lymph nodes (18 [47%]) showed no difference in OS compared with patients with node-negative disease (24-month OS: lymph node negative: 60%; 95% CI, 40%-91% vs lymph node positive: 50%; 95% CI, 30%-83%; P = .66). Four patients (11%) had grade 4 toxic effects requiring removal from the study (1 portal hypertension, 2 gastroduodenal artery aneurysms, 1 infection in the pump pocket). Subgroup analysis showed significant improvement in survival in patients with IDH1/2 mutated tumors (2-year OS, 90%; 95% CI, 73%-99%) vs wild-type (2-year OS, 33%; 95% CI, 18%-63%) (P = .01). In the Washington University in St Louis confirmatory cohort, 9 patients (90%) achieved disease control at 6 months; the most common grade 3 toxic effect was elevated results of liver function tests, and median PFS was 12.8 months (1-sided 90% CI, 6.4). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Hepatic arterial infusion plus systemic chemotherapy appears to be highly active and tolerable in patients with unresectable IHC; further evaluation is warranted.

Organ procurement center allows for daytime liver transplantation with less resource utilization: May address burnout, pipeline, and safety for field of transplantation.

Abdominal organ transplantation faces several challenges: burnout, limited pipeline of future surgeons, changes in liver allocation potentially impacting organ procurement travel, and travel safety. The organ procurement center (OPC) model may be one way to mitigate these issues. Liver transplants from 2009 to 2016 were reviewed. There were 755 liver transplants performed with 525 OPC and 230 in-hospital procurements. The majority of transplants (87.4%) were started during daytime hours (5 am-7 pm). Transplants with any portion occurring after-hours were more likely to have procurements in-hospital (P < .001). Daytime cases (n = 400) had more OPC procured livers and hepatitis C recipients and were less likely to have a donation after circulatory death donor (all P < .05). In adjusted analyses, daytime cases were independently associated with extubation in the operating room and less postoperative transfusion. There were no significant differences in short- or long-term postoperative outcomes. For exported livers, 54.3% were procured by a local team, saving 137 flights (151 559 miles). The OPC resulted in optimally timed liver transplants and decreased resource utilization with no negative impact on patient outcomes. It allows for ease in exporting organs procured by local surgeons, and potentially addresses provider burnout, the transplant surgery pipeline, and surgeon travel.

Cost Evaluation of a Donation after Cardiac Death Program: How Cost per Organ Compares to Other Donor Types.

BACKGROUND: Donation after cardiac death (DCD) is one method of organ donation. Nationally, more than half of evaluated DCD donors do not yield transplantable organs. There is no algorithm for predicting which DCD donors will be appropriate for organ procurement. Donation after cardiac death program costs from an organ procurement organization (OPO) accounting for all evaluated donors have not been reported. STUDY DESIGN: Hospital, transportation, and supply costs of potential DCD donors evaluated at a single OPO from January 2009 to June 2016 were collected. Mean costs per donor and per organ were calculated. Cost of DCD donors that did not yield a transplantable organ were included in cost analyses resulting in total cost of the DCD program. Donation after cardiac death donor costs were compared with costs of in-hospital donation after brain death (DBD) donors. RESULTS: There were 289 organs transplanted from 264 DCD donors evaluated. Mean cost per DCD donor yielding transplantable organs was $9,306. However, 127 donors yielded no organs, at a mean cost of $8,794 per donor. The total cost of the DCD program was $32,020 per donor and $15,179 per organ. Mean cost for an in-hospital DBD donor was $33,546 and $9,478 per organ transplanted. Mean organ yield for DBD donors was 3.54 vs 2.21 for DCD donors (p < 0.0001), making the cost per DBD organ 63% of the cost of a DCD organ. CONCLUSIONS: Mean cost per DCD donor is comparable with DBD donors, however, individual cost of DCD organs increases by almost 40% when all costs of an entire DCD program are included.

Organ Donor Recovery Performed at an Organ Procurement Organization-Based Facility Is an Effective Way to Minimize Organ Recovery Costs and Increase Organ Yield.

BACKGROUND: A new era in organ donation with national redistricting is being proposed. With these proposals, costs of organ acquisition are estimated to more than double. Traditionally, organ recoveries occur in the donor hospital setting, incurring premium hospital expenses. The aim of the study was to determine organ recovery costs and organ yield for donor recoveries performed at an organ procurement organization (OPO) facility. STUDY DESIGN: In 2001, we established an OPO facility and in 2008 began transferring the donor expeditiously when brain death was declared. The OPO donor and hospital costs on a per donor basis were calculated. Donation after cardiac death donors cannot be transferred and were included in the hospital cost analysis. RESULTS: From January 2009 to December 2014, nine hundred and sixty-three donors originating in our OPO had organs recovered and transplanted. Seven hundred and sixty-six (79.5%) donors were transferred to the OPO facility 8.6 hours (range 0.6 to 23.6 hours) after declaration of brain death. Donor recovery cost was 51% less when donors were transferred to the OPO facility ($16,153 OPO recovery vs $33,161 hospital recovery; p < 0.0001). Organ yield was 27.5% better (3.43 organs) from OPO-recovered donors vs an organ yield of 2.69 from hospital-recovered donors (p < 0.0001). Standard criteria donor organ yield from our OPO was 6% higher than the national average (3.92 vs 3.7 nationally; p = 0.012) and expanded criteria donor organ yield was 18% higher (2.2 vs 1.87 nationally; p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: An OPO facility for donor organ recovery increases efficiency and organ yield, reduces costs, and minimizes organ acquisition charge. As we face new considerations with broader sharing, increased efficiencies, cost. and organ use should be considered.

Organ allocation in pediatric renal transplants: is there an optimal donor?

The 2005 revised allocation scheme for pediatric renal transplantation made the decision of whether to transplant an available living-donor (LD) kidney or use a deceased-donor (DD) kidney controversial. The aim of this study was to examine kidney allograft utilization, sensitization, and outcomes of pediatric transplant recipients. Between January 2000 and December 2009, 91 consecutive pediatric kidney recipients (<20 yr) were transplanted. The LD (n = 38) and DD (n = 53) groups were similar in age, gender, dialysis status at transplant, warm ischemia time, and overall patient survival. LD recipients were more likely to be Caucasian (92 vs. 69%), receive older allografts (39 ± 10 vs. 23 ± 9 yr), and have fewer human leukocyte antigen (HLA) mismatches (3.3 ± 1.6 vs. 4.4 ± 1.5, p < 0.01 for all). Graft survival at one, three, and five yr post-transplant was longer for LD recipients (97%, 91%, 87% vs. DD 89%, 79%, 58%, respectively, p < 0.05). At the time of transplant, 17 (33%) DD recipients had an available LD (mean age 40 yr). A greater proportion of all patients were moderately (PRA 21-79%) sensitized post-transplant (p < 0.05). A multivariable analysis of graft survival indicated that the advantage in LD organs was likely due to fewer HLA mismatched in this group. Nonetheless, LD organs appear to provide optimal outcomes in pediatric renal transplants when considering the risk of becoming sensitized post-transplant complicating later use of the LD kidney.