Association of procurement technique with organ yield and cost following donation after circulatory death.

Donation after circulatory death (DCD) could account for the largest expansion of the donor allograft pool in the contemporary era. However, the organ yield and associated costs of normothermic regional perfusion (NRP) compared to super-rapid recovery (SRR) with ex-situ normothermic machine perfusion, remain unreported. The Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (December 2019 to June 2023) was analyzed to determine the number of organs recovered per donor. A cost analysis was performed based on our institution's experience since 2022. Of 43 502 donors, 30 646 (70%) were donors after brain death (DBD), 12 536 (29%) DCD-SRR and 320 (0.7%) DCD-NRP. The mean number of organs recovered was 3.70 for DBD, 3.71 for DCD-NRP (P < .001), and 2.45 for DCD-SRR (P < .001). Following risk adjustment, DCD-NRP (adjusted odds ratio 1.34, confidence interval 1.04-1.75) and DCD-SRR (adjusted odds ratio 2.11, confidence interval 2.01-2.21; reference: DBD) remained associated with greater odds of allograft nonuse. Including incomplete and completed procurement runs, the total average cost of DCD-NRP was $9463.22 per donor. By conservative estimates, we found that approximately 31 donor allografts could be procured using DCD-NRP for the cost equivalent of 1 allograft procured via DCD-SRR with ex-situ normothermic machine perfusion. In conclusion, DCD-SRR procurements were associated with the lowest organ yield compared to other procurement methods. To facilitate broader adoption of DCD procurement, a comprehensive understanding of the trade-offs inherent in each technique is imperative.

Impact of the Pediatric ABO Policy Change on Listings, Transplants, and Outcomes for Children Younger Than 2 Years Listed for Heart Transplantation in the United States.

BACKGROUND: We assessed the impact of the liberalized ABO pediatric policy change on candidate characteristics and outcomes for children undergoing heart transplant (HT). METHODS AND RESULTS: Children <2 years undergoing HT with ABO strategy reported at listing and HT from December 2011 to November 2020 to the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients database were included. Characteristics at listing, HT, and outcomes during the waitlist and post-transplant were compared before the policy change (December 16, 2011 to July 6, 2016), and after the policy change (July 7, 2016 to November 30, 2020). The percentage of ABO-incompatible (ABOi) listings did not increase immediately after the policy change (P = .93); however, ABOi transplants increased by 18% (P < .0001). At listing, both before and after the policy change, ABOi candidates had higher urgency status, renal dysfunction, lower albumin, and required more cardiac support (intravenous inotropes, mechanical ventilation) than those listed ABO compatible (ABOc). On multivariable analysis, there were no differences in waitlist mortality between children listed as ABOi and ABOc before the policy change (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.80, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.61-1.05, P = .10) or after the policy change (aHR 1.2, 95% CI 0.85-1.6, P = .33). Post-transplant graft survival was worse for ABOi transplanted children before the policy change (aHR 1.8, 95% CI 1.1-2.8, P = .014), but not significantly different after the policy change (aHR 0.94, 95% CI 0.61-1.4, P = .76). After the policy change, ABOi listed children had significantly shorter waitlist times (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: The recent pediatric ABO policy change has significantly increased the percentage of ABOi transplantations and decreased waitlist times for children listed ABOi. This change in policy has resulted in broader applicability and actual performance of ABOi transplantation with equal access to ABOi or ABOc organs, and thus eliminated the potential disadvantage of only secondary allocation to ABOi recipients.

Lung transplantation in primary pulmonary arterial hypertension and pulmonary venous hypertension.

OBJECTIVES: End-stage lung disease from primary pulmonary hypertension (PPHTN) and pulmonary venous-occlusive disease (PVOD) may require lung transplantation (LT). While medical therapies exist for the palliation of PPHTN, no therapies exist for PVOD. The study's objective is to compare outcomes of LT in these patients. METHODS: Patients with PPHTN and PVOD who had undergone LT were identified in the UNOS database (2005-2022). Univariable analyses compared differences between groups in demographic, clinical, and post-transplant outcomes. Multivariable logistic regression examined the association between the diagnosis group and survival. Overall survival time between groups was compared using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: Six hundred and ninety-six PPHTN and 78 PVOD patients underwent LT during the study period. Patients with PVOD had lower pulmonary artery mean pressure (47 vs. 53 mmHg, p < .001), but higher cardiac output (4.51 vs. 4.31 L/min, p = .04). PVOD patients were more likely to receive lungs from donation after cardiac death donors (7.7 vs. 2.9%, p = .04). There were no differences in postoperative complications or length of stay. PVOD was associated with superior survival at 30-day (100 vs. 93%, p = .02) and 90-day post-transplant (93 vs. 83%, p = .03), but not at later time points. In multivariable analyses, PVOD and brain death donor use were associated with better survival up to 90-day mark. CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing LT for PVOD had better initial survival, which disappeared after 1 year of transplantation. Donation after circulatory death donor use had a short-term survival disadvantage.

Does lung procurement and exposure to Perfadex impact heart transplantation outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: Some studies have shown increased incidence of Primary Graft Dysfunction (PGD) after heart and lung procurement for heart transplant recipients. There have been limited investigations of the impact of lung procurement on heart procurement and the potential effects of the exposure to the type of lung preservation solution, the volume of the lung preservation solution and adequacy of decompression of the heart during heart and lung procurement and the impact on heart transplant outcomes. METHODS: Adult heart transplant recipients in the UNOS database recorded from January 1, 2000 to June 30, 2022 formed the study cohort. Any heart that was procured with a lung team that utilized Perfadex preservation solution (XVIVO, Gothenburg, Sweden) was classified as exposed to Perfadex and otherwise classified as not exposed to Perfadex. Lung procurements performed with a preservation solution other than Perfadex or unknown were excluded (n = 2486). Simple comparisons were made with t-tests or chi-squared tests. Logistic regression models were used to predict 30 day and 1 year survival. Accelerated failure time models were employed to analyze time to death and time to rejection. RESULTS: The cohort consisted of 34 192 heart transplants, of which 21 928 donors were not exposed to Perfadex (64.1%). There were statistically, but not clinically, significant differences in donor characteristics for these groups including in donor age (33.34 ± 11.01 not exposed vs. 30.70 ± 10.69 exposed; p < .001), diabetic donor (4% not exposed vs. 3% exposed; p = .004), and ischemic time (3.28 ± 1.09 h not exposed vs. 3.24 ± 1.05 h exposed; p = .002). In adjusted models, for all included donors, Perfadex exposure was associated with increased short term mortality, but no long term difference (1 year mortality OR 1.10, p = .014). CONCLUSION: Perfadex exposure was associated with increased short-term mortality for heart transplant recipients. Mechanistic investigation is warranted.

Miscalibration of lung allocation models leads to inaccurate waitlist mortality predictions.

The importance of waitlist (WL) mortality risk estimates will increase with the adoption of the US Composite Allocation Score (CAS) system. Calibration is rarely assessed in clinical prediction models, yet it is a key factor in determining access to lung transplant. We assessed the calibration of the WL-lung allocation score (LAS)/CAS models and developed alternative models to minimize miscalibration. Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients data from 2015 to 2020 were used to assess the calibration of the WL model and for subgroups (age, sex, diagnosis, and race/ethnicity). Three recalibrated models were developed and compared: (1) simple recalibration model (SRM), (2) weighted recalibration model 1 (WRM1), and (3) weighted recalibration model 2 (WRM2). The current WL-LAS/CAS model underestimated risk for 78% of individuals (predicted mortality risk, <42%) and overpredicted risk for 22% of individuals (predicted mortality risk, ≥42%), with divergent results among subgroups. Error measures improved in SRM, WRM1, and WRM2. SRM generally preserved candidate rankings, whereas WRM1 and WRM2 led to changes in ranking by age and diagnosis. Differential miscalibration occurred in the WL-LAS/CAS model, which improved with recalibration measures. Further inquiry is needed to develop mortality models in which risk predictions approximate observed data to ensure accurate ranking and timely access to transplant. IMPACT: With changes to the lung transplant allocation system planned in 2023, evaluation of the accuracy and precision of survival models used to rank candidates for lung transplant is important. The waitlist model underpredicts risk for 78% of US transplant candidates with an unequal distribution of miscalibration across subgroups leading to inaccurate ranking of transplant candidates. This work will serve to inform future efforts to improve modeling efforts in the US lung transplant allocation system.

The association of donor hepatitis C virus infection with 3-year kidney transplant outcomes in the era of direct-acting antiviral medications.

To determine the effect of donor hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection on kidney transplant (KT) outcomes in the era of direct-acting antiviral (DAA) medications, we examined 68,087 HCV-negative KT recipients from a deceased donor between March 2015 and May 2021. A Cox regression analysis was used to estimate adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) of KT failure, incorporating inverse probability of treatment weighting to control for patient selection to receive an HCV-positive kidney (either nucleic acid amplification test positive [NAT+, n = 2331] or antibody positive (Ab+)/NAT- [n = 1826]) based on recipient characteristics. Compared with kidney from HCV-negative donors, those from Ab+/NAT- (aHR = 0.91; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.75-1.10) and HCV NAT+ (aHR = 0.89; 95% CI, 0.73-1.08) donors were not associated with an increased risk of KT failure over 3 years after transplant. Moreover, HCV NAT+ kidneys were associated with a higher 1-year estimated glomerular filtration (63.0 vs 61.0 mL/min/1.73 m2, P = .007) and lower risk of delayed graft function (aOR = 0.76; 95% CI, 0.68-0.84) compared with HCV-negative kidneys. Our findings suggest that donor HCV positivity is not associated with an elevated risk of graft failure. The inclusion of donor HCV status in the Kidney Donor Risk Index may no longer be appropriate in contemporary practice.

Information design to support growth, quality, and equity of the US transplant system.

The Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network, an arm of the Health Resources and Services Administration, has a contract with the United Network for Organ Sharing since 1986 to provide central oversight of organ donation and transplants in the United States. The United Network for Organ Sharing has recently come under scrutiny, prompting a review by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine as summarized in its recent report and also by the US Senate Finance Committee. The national news services have opined about organ donation ethics, access to transplantation particularly for medically underserved populations, and management of organ transplantation data. These critiques raise important concerns that deserve our best response as a transplant community. Broadly, we suggest that the data management approach of the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network be replaced with a patient-centric omnichannel network in which all donor and recipient data exist in a single longitudinal record that can be used by all applications. A more comprehensive and standardized approach to donor data collection would drive quality improvement across organ procurement organizations and help address inequities in transplantation. Finally, a substantial increase in organ donation would be prompted by considering organ donors as a public health resource, meriting transparent publicly available data collection with respect to organ donor referral, screening, and management.

Does anybody really know what (the kidney median waiting) time is?

The median waiting time (MWT) to deceased donor kidney transplant is of interest to patients, clinicians, and the media but remains elusive due to both methodological and philosophical challenges. We used Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network data from January 2003 to March 2022 to estimate MWTs using various methods and timescales, applied overall, by era, and by candidate demographics. After rising for a decade, the overall MWT fell to 5.19 years between 2015 and 2018 and declined again to 4.05 years (April 2021 to March 2022), based on the Kaplan-Meier method applied to period-prevalent cohorts. MWTs differed markedly by blood type, donor service area, and pediatric vs adult status, but to a lesser degree by race/ethnicity. Choice of methodology affected the magnitude of these differences. Instead of waiting years for an answer, reliable kidney MWT estimates can be obtained shortly after a policy is implemented using the period-prevalent Kaplan-Meier approach, a theoretical but useful construct for which we found no evidence of bias compared with using incident cohorts. We recommend this method be used complementary to the competing risks approach, under which MWT is often inestimable, to fill the present information void concerning the seemingly simple question of how long it takes to get a kidney transplant in the United States.

Solid organ transplant recipients with tuberculosis disease in California, 2010 to 2020.

Using California Tuberculosis (TB) Registry data from 2010-2020, we compared the presentation and outcomes of patients with TB aged >15 years with and without solid organ transplantation (SOT). We matched to the United Network for Organ Sharing registry for 1987-2020 and the estimated time from transplantation to the diagnosis of TB, the incidence of posttransplant TB, and the probability of death and graft failure in SOT recipients with TB, compared to those without TB. From 2010-2020, there were 148 posttransplant TB cases. Patients with posttransplant TB were more likely to have extrapulmonary disease and more than twice as likely to die as TB patients without SOT (relative risk [RR], 2.2; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.6-2.9). The median time from transplantation to TB diagnosis was 1.2 years, with the shortest time among lung transplant recipients. The incidence of TB disease among Californians with SOT was 56.0 per 100 000 person-years. The risk of death was higher among SOT recipients with posttransplant TB than those without (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.8; 95% CI, 2.0-4.1); the risk of graft failure was higher among kidney transplant recipients with posttransplant TB than those without (adjusted hazard ratio, 3.4; 95% CI, 1.7-6.9). An increased risk of death and graft failure in SOT recipients with posttransplant TB highlights the need for enhanced pretransplant TB prevention.

The real unmet need: A multifactorial approach for identifying sensitized kidney candidates with low access to transplant.

BACKGROUND: At the start of 2020, the kidney waiting list consisted of 2526 candidates with a calculated panel reactive antibody (CPRA) of 99.9% or greater, a cohort demonstrated in published research to have meaningfully lower than average access to transplantation even under the revised kidney allocation system (KAS). METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of US kidney registrations using data from the OPTN [Reference (https://optn.transplant.hrsa.gov/data/about-data/)]. The period-prevalent study cohort consisted of US kidney-alone registrations who waited at least 1 day between April 1, 2016, when HLA DQ-Alpha and DP-Beta unacceptable antigen data became available in OPTN data collection, to December 31, 2019. Poisson rate regression was used to model deceased donor kidney transplant rates per active year waiting and using an offset term to account for differential at-risk periods. Median time to transplant was estimated for each IRR group using the Kaplan-Meier method. Sensitivity analyses were included to address geographic variation in supply-to-demand ratios and differences in dialysis time or waiting time. RESULTS: In this study, we found 1597 additional sensitized (CPRA 50-<99.9%) candidates with meaningfully lower than average access to transplant when simultaneously taking into account CPRA and other factors. In combination with CPRA, candidate blood type, Estimated Post-Transplant Survival Score (EPTS), and presence of other antibody specificities beyond those in the current, 5-locus CPRA were found to influence the likelihood of transplant. CONCLUSION: In total, this suggests approximately 4100 sensitized candidates are on the waiting list who represent a community of disadvantaged patients who may benefit from progressive therapies and interventions to facilitate incompatible transplantation. Though associated with higher risks, such interventions may nevertheless be more attractive than remaining on dialysis with the associated accumulation of mortality risk over time.

Positive donor blood cultures are not associated with worse heart transplant survival.

BACKGROUND: Recent evidence has demonstrated that transplantation of hearts with blood culture positive donors (BCPDs) to pediatric recipients is safe and effective. Few studies have analyzed the effect of BCPD on adult heart transplant recipients. METHODS: The United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) database was retrospectively reviewed from September, 1987 to March, 2021. Exclusion criteria included pediatric donors/recipients, donor ejection fraction <10% or >85%, inactive listed recipients, donors missing blood cultures, and recipients missing follow-up time. Outcomes were compared with fully adjusted logistic models. To account for discrepancies in BCPD and non-BCPD covariates, an inverse proportionally weighted model with regression adjustment (IPWRA) was used. RESULTS: A total of 60 592 donors were non-BCPD, while 4009 were BCPD. 7% of hearts not transplanted were BCPD, while 6% of hearts transplanted were BCPD (p = .001). These rates have been nearly constant since 2005. There were no differences in short term survival between the two groups in the adjusted or IPWRA models (p = .103 and .277, respectively). Additionally, the BCPD group had longer ischemic time (3.24 vs. 3.06 h, p < .001), older donor age (32.73 vs. 31.65 years, p < .001), and older recipient age (52.76 vs. 52.09 years, p = .001). The IPWRA revealed an average additional 3.4 years of overall survival and 2.25 years of graft function for BCPD versus non-BCPD recipients, although these results failed to reach statistical significance (p = .387 and .527, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Given the need for more donor hearts, donors with positive blood cultures should be considered. Great care in evaluating such patients is advised to eliminate donors with untreated infections, while carefully selected donors can be considered and used.

Impact of donor-recipient age-difference in adolescent heart transplantation.

INTRODUCTION: The relationship between donor age and adolescent heart transplant outcomes remains incompletely understood. We aimed to explore the effect of donor-recipient age difference on survival after adolescent heart transplantation. METHODS: The United Network for Organ Sharing database was used to identify 2,855 adolescents aged 10-17 years undergoing isolated primary heart transplantation from 1/1/2000 to 12/31/2022. The primary outcome was 10-year post-transplant survival. Multivariable Cox regression identified predictors of mortality after adjusting for donor and recipient characteristics. A restricted cubic spline assessed the non-linear association between donor-recipient age-difference and the adjusted relative mortality hazard. RESULTS: The median donor-recipient age-difference was +3 (range -13 to +47) years, and 17.7% (n = 504) of recipients had an age- difference > 10 years. Recipients with an age-difference > 10 years had a less favorable pre-transplant profile, including a higher incidence of priority status 1A (81.6%, n = 411 vs. 73.6%, n = 1730; p = .01). The 10-year survival rate was 54.6% (95% confidence interval (CI) 48.8- 60.4) among recipients with a donor-recipient age-difference > 10 years and 66.9% (95% CI: 64.4-69.4) among those with an age-difference ≤10 years. An age-difference > 10 years was an independent predictor of mortality (hazard ratio 1.43, 95% CI: 1.18-1.72, p < .001). Spline analysis demonstrated that the adjusted mortality hazard increased with increasingly positive donor-recipient age-difference and became significantly higher at an age-difference of 11 years. CONCLUSION: A donor-recipient age-difference > 11 years is independently associated with higher long-term mortality after adolescent heart transplantation. This finding may help inform acceptable donor selection practice for adolescent heart transplant candidates.

Pediatric heart transplant waiting times in the United States since the 2016 allocation policy change.

We describe waiting times for pediatric heart transplant (HT) candidates after the 2016 revision to the US allocation policy. The OPTN database was queried for pediatric HT candidates listed between 7/2016 and 4/2019. Of the 1789 included candidates, 65% underwent HT, 14% died/deteriorated, 8% were removed for improvement, and 13% were still waiting at the end of follow-up. Most candidates were status 1A at HT (81%). Median wait times differ substantially by listing status, blood type, and recipient weight. The likelihood of HT was lower in candidates <25 kg and in those with blood type O; The <25 kg, blood type O subgroup experiences longer wait times and higher wait list mortality. For status 1A candidates, median wait times were 108 days (≤25 kg, blood type O), 80 days (≤25 kg, non-O), 47 days (>25 kg, O), and 24 days (>25 kg, non-O). We found that centers with more selective organ acceptance practices, based on a lower median Pediatric Heart Donor Assessment Tool (PH-DAT) score for completed transplants, experience longer status 1A wait times for their listed patients. These data can be used to counsel families and to select appropriate advanced heart failure therapies to support patients to transplant.

Transplant program evaluations in the middle of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Potential regional variations in effects of COVID-19 on federally mandated, program-specific evaluations by the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) have been controversial. SRTR January 2022 program evaluations ended transplant follow-up on March 12, 2020, and excluded transplants performed from March 13, 2020 to June 12, 2020 (the "carve-out"). This study examined the carve-out's impact, and the effect of additionally censoring COVID-19 deaths, on first-year posttransplant outcomes for transplants from July 2018 through December 2020. Program-specific hazard ratios (HRs) for graft failure and death estimated under two alternative scenarios were compared with published HRs: (1) the carve-out was removed; (2) the carve-out was retained, but deaths due to COVID-19 were additionally censored. The HRs estimated by censoring COVID-19 deaths were highly correlated with those estimated with the carve-out alone (r2  = .96). Removal of the carve-out resulted in greater variation in HRs while remaining highly correlated (r2  = .82); however, little geographic impact of the carve-out was observed. The carve-out increased average HR in the Northwest by 0.049; carve-out plus censoring reduced average HR in the Midwest by 0.009. Other regions of the country were not significantly affected. Thus, the current COVID-19 carve-out does not appear to impart substantial bias based on the region of the country.

Life expectancy without a transplant for status 1A liver transplant candidates.

Status 1A liver transplant candidates are given the highest medical priority for the allocation of deceased donor livers. Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) policy requires physicians to certify that a candidate has a life expectancy without a transplant of less than 7 days for that candidate to be given status 1A. Additionally, candidates receiving status 1A must have one of six medical conditions listed in policy. Using Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients data from all prevalent liver transplant candidates from 2010 to 2020, we used a bias-corrected Kaplan-Meier model to calculate the survival of status 1A candidates and to determine their life expectancy without a transplant. We found that status 1A candidates have a life expectancy without a transplant of 24 (95% CI 20-46) days-over three times longer than what policy requires for status 1A designation. We repeated the analysis for subgroups of status 1A candidates based on the medical conditions that grant status 1A. We found that none of these subgroups met the life expectancy requirement. Harmonizing OPTN policy with observed data would sustain the integrity of the allocation process.

Procurement characteristics of high- and low-performing OPOs as seen in OPTN/SRTR data.

To meet new Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) metrics, organ procurement organizations (OPOs) will benefit from understanding performance across decedent and hospital types. We sought to determine the utility of existing data-reporting structures for this purpose by reviewing Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipient (SRTR) OPO-Specific Reports (OSRs) from 2013 to 2019. OSRs contain both the Standardized donation rate ratio (SDRR) metric and OPO-reported numbers of "eligible deaths" and donors by hospital. Donor hospitals were characterized using information from Homeland Infrastructure Foundation-Level Data, Dartmouth Atlas Hospital Service Area data, and the US Census Bureau. Hospital data reported by OPOs showed 51% higher eligible death donors and 140% higher noneligible death donors per 100 inpatient beds in CMS ranked top versus bottom-quartile OPOs. Top-quartile OPOs by the CMS metric recovered 78% more donors than those in the bottom quartile, but were indistinguishable by SDRR rankings. These differences persisted across hospital sizes, trauma case mix, and area demographics. OPOs with divergent performance were indistinguishable over time by SDRR, but showed changes to hospital-level recovery patterns in SRTR data. Contemporaneous recognition of underperformance across hospitals may provide important and actionable data for regulators and OPOs for focused quality improvement projects.

Not everything that counts can be counted: Tracking long-term outcomes in pediatric liver transplant recipients.

For pediatric liver transplant (LT) recipients, an ideal outcome is to survive and thrive into adulthood. However, outcomes reporting for all LT recipients typically rely on much shorter-term outcomes, 1-5 years post-LT. Using Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) registry data from 1990 to 2018, this analysis seeks to determine if long-term follow-up and outcome data are complete for pediatric LT recipients age 0 to 12 years who survive at least 1 year post-LT without graft loss (n = 9309). Of the 7948 pediatric transplant recipients who did not die or require re-LT, 1 in 6 was reported as lost to follow-up by their transplant center during long-term follow-up. Rates of lost to follow-up were highest in those transplanted between 1990 and 1999 and increased in early adulthood for all recipients. Almost 10% of pediatric LT recipients who remained in follow-up required relisting for LT. 8% of children remaining in follow-up had graft failure. Lost to follow-up may bias estimates of long-term outcomes and risk factors for poor outcomes. For those remaining in follow-up, graft failure and death continue to occur in the decades after LT. Continued proactive monitoring, management, and innovations are needed to truly optimize post-LT survival for all children.

An updated estimate of posttransplant survival after implementation of the new donor heart allocation policy.

The Organ Procurement and Transplant Network (OPTN) implemented a new heart allocation policy on October 18, 2018. Published estimates of lower posttransplant survival under the new policy in cohorts with limited follow-up may be biased by informative censoring. Using the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients, we used the Kaplan-Meier method to estimate 1-year posttransplant survival for pre-policy (November 1, 2016, to October 31, 2017) and post-policy cohorts (November 1, 2018, to October 31, 2019) with follow-up through March 2, 2021. We adjusted for changes in recipient population over time with a multivariable Cox proportional hazards model. To demonstrate the effect of inadequate follow-up on post-policy survival estimates, we repeated the analysis but only included follow-up through October 31, 2019. Transplant programs transplanted 2594 patients in the pre-policy cohort and 2761 patients in the post-policy cohort. With follow-up through March 2, 2021, unadjusted 1-year posttransplant survival was 90.6% (89.5%-91.8%) in the pre-policy cohort and 90.8% (89.7%-91.9%) in the post-policy cohort (adjusted HR = 0.93 [0.77-1.12]). Ignoring follow-up after October 31, 2019, the post-policy estimate was biased downward (1-year: 82.2%). When estimated with adequate follow-up, 1-year posttransplant survival under the new heart allocation policy was not significantly different.

Center-level and region-level variations in liver transplantation practices following acuity circles policy change.

Although early studies suggest the Acuity Circles (AC) allocation policy has increased access to deceased donor liver transplants (DDLTs) for patients with the highest MELD scores, changes in center- and region-level practices among patients with the highest MELD scores in response to AC are not well-characterized. OPTN/UNOS data were analyzed to compare center-level changes in the number of DDLTs based on allocation-MELD (aMELD) categories used for AC sharing performed in the 18-month periods before and after AC enactment on February 4, 2020. There was large center-level variation in the number and proportion of aMELD ≥ 37 DDLTs performed from pre-AC to AC period; 13 centers accounted for 196 of the 198 total net increase in aMELD ≥ 37 DDLTs performed after AC, 5 of these being from UNOS region 5. Similar center-level variation was seen for MELD 33-36 and MELD 29-32 DDLTs, with 17 centers and 14 centers, respectively, accounting for the entire net increase in DDLTs in the aMELD categories. In conclusion, AC increased access to livers for transplantation for high MELD patients nationally, but imbalances remain in transplant practice patterns at the center and regional levels. Longer-term study is necessary to assess effectiveness of AC in improving equitability of liver transplantations.

Impact of the acuity circle model for liver allocation on multivisceral transplant candidates.

Liver allocation was updated on February 4, 2020, replacing a Donor Service Area (DSA) with acuity circles (AC). The impact on waitlist outcomes for patients listed for combined liver-intestine transplantation (multivisceral transplantation [MVT]) remains unknown. The Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network/United Network for Organ Sharing database was used to identify all candidates listed for both liver and intestine between January 1, 2018 and March 5, 2021. Two eras were defined: pre-AC (2018-2020) and post-AC (2020-2021). Outcomes included 90-day waitlist mortality and transplant probability. A total of 127 adult and 104 pediatric MVT listings were identified. In adults, the 90-day waitlist mortality was not statistically significantly different, but transplant probability was lower post-AC. After risk-adjustment, post-AC was associated with a higher albeit not statistically significantly different mortality hazard (sub-distribution hazard ratio[sHR]: 8.45, 95% CI: 0.96-74.05; p = .054), but a significantly lower transplant probability (sHR: 0.33, 95% CI: 0.15-0.75; p = .008). For pediatric patients, waitlist mortality and transplant probability were similar between eras. The proportion of patients who underwent transplant with exception points was lower post-AC both in adult (44% to 9%; p = .04) and pediatric recipients (65% to 15%; p = .002). A lower transplant probability observed in adults listed for MVT may ultimately result in increased waitlist mortality. Efforts should be taken to ensure equitable organ allocation in this vulnerable patient population.