OPTN/SRTR 2020 Annual Data Report: Living Donor Collective

The first successful solid organ transplant was a living donor kidney transplant in 1954. Since then, living donation has been an important source of organs for kidney and liver transplants in the United States. Unfortunately, the demand for organs has not kept pace with the supply, and unlike deceased donor transplant, there has been little growth in the number of living donor transplants over the past decade. To better understand possible barriers to living donation and long-term risks attributable to donation, the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) directed the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) to establish a national registry of all living donor candidates and donors evaluated at US transplant programs to acquire lifetime follow-up information. Other goals include understanding the factors associated with candidate approval and variation in approval practices across centers. A pilot program was conducted from June 2018 through September 2020 to inform baseline data collection and registration processes. In September 2020, the registry began recruiting additional sites evaluating candidates for living donation. Here, we describe candidates registered at participating living donor kidney and liver programs, from June 2018 through the end of 2020. Not all programs submitted data throughout the whole period. Data for kidney and liver living donor candidates are presented separately.

OPTN/SRTR 2020 Annual Data Report: Kidney.

The year 2020 presented significant challenges to the field of kidney transplantation. After increasing each year since 2015 and reaching the highest annual count to date in 2019, the total number of kidney trans- plants decreased slightly, to 23642, in 2020. The decrease in total kidney transplants was due to a decrease in living donor transplants; the number of deceased donor transplants rose in 2020. The number of patients waiting for a kidney transplant in the United States declined slightly in 2020, driven by a slight drop in the number of new candidates added in 2020 and an increase in patients removed from the waiting list owing to death-important patterns that correlated with the COVID-19 pandemic. The complexities of the pandemic were accompanied by other ongoing challenges. Nationwide, only about a quarter of waitlisted patients receive a deceased donor kidney transplant within 5 years, a proportion that varies dramatically by donation service area, from 14.8% to 73.0%. The nonutilization (discard) rate of recovered organs rose to its highest value, at 21.3%, despite a dramatic decline in the discard of organs from hepatitis C-positive donors. Nonutilization rates remain particularly high for Kidney Donor Profile Index ≥85% kidneys and kidneys from which a biopsy specimen was obtained. Due to pandemic-related disruption of living donation in spring 2020, the number of living donor transplants in 2020 declined below annual counts over the last decade. In this context, only a small proportion of the waiting list receives living donor transplants each year, and racial disparities in living donor transplant access persist. As both graft and patient survival continue to improve incrementally, the total number of living kidney transplant recipients with a functioning graft exceeded 250,000 in 2020. Pediatric transplant numbers seem to have been impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. The total number of pediatric kidney transplants performed decreased to 715 in 2020, from a peak of 872 in 2009. Despite numerous efforts, living donor kidney transplant remains low among pediatric recipients, with continued racial disparities among recipients. Of concern, the rate of deceased donor transplant among pediatric waitlisted candidates continued to decrease, reaching its lowest point in 2020. While this may be partly explained by the COVID-19 pandemic, close attention to this trend is critically important. Congenital anomalies of the kidney and urinary tract remain the leading cause of kidney disease in the pediatric population. While most pediatric de- ceased donor recipients receive a kidney from a donor with KDPI less than 35%, most pediatric deceased donor recipients had four or more HLA mis- matches. Graft survival continues to improve, with superior survival for living donor recipients versus deceased donor recipients.

OPTN/SRTR 2019 Annual Data Report: Kidney.

Despite the ongoing severe shortage of available kidney grafts relative to candidates in need, data from 2019 reveal some promising trends. After remaining relatively stagnant for many years, the number of kidney transplants has increased each year since 2015, reaching the highest annual count to date of 24,273 in 2019. The number of patients waiting for a kidney transplant in the United States was relatively stable, despite an increase in the number of new candidates added in 2019 and a decrease in patients removed from the waiting list owing to death or deteriorating medical condition. However, these encouraging trends are tempered by ongoing challenges. Nationwide, only a quarter of waitlisted patients receive a deceased-donor kidney transplant within 5 years, and this proportion varies dramatically by donation service area, from 15.5% to 67.8%. The non-utilization (discard) rate of recovered organs remains at 20.1%, despite adramatic decline in the discard of organs from hepatitis C-positive donors. Non-utilization rates remain particularly high for Kidney Donor Profile Index ≥85% kidneys and kidneys from which a biopsy specimen was obtained. While the number of living-donor transplants increased again in 2019, only a small proportion of the waiting list receives living-donor transplants each year, and racial disparities in living-donor transplant access persist. As both graft and patient survival continue to improve incrementally, the total number of living kidney transplant recipients with a functioning graft is anticipated to exceed 250,000 in the next 1-2 years. Over the past decade, the total number of pediatric kidney transplants performed has remained stable. Despite numerous efforts, living donor kidney transplant remains low among pediatric recipients with continued racial disparities among recipients. Congenital anomalies of the kidney and urinary tract remain the leading cause of kidney disease. While most deceased donor recipients receive a kidney from a donor with KDPI less than 35%, the majority of pediatric recipients had four or more HLA mismatches. Graft survival continues to improve with superior outcomes for living donor recipients.

OPTN/SRTR 2016 Annual Data Report: Economics.

Medicare costs vary for solid organ transplant recipients by outcome: survival with graft function, survival with graft failure, and death. Average per-person per-year reimbursement was $75 thousand for kidney recipients who survived the first year posttransplant with a functioning graft, $171 thousand for those who required a return to dialysis or retransplant, and $350 thousand for those who died with function. For pancreas recipients: $105 thousand for those who survived the first year with a functioning graft, $120 thousand for those who survived pancreas failure, and $443 thousand for those who died with function. For liver recipients: $154 thousand for those who survived with a functioning graft, $388 thousand for those who required retransplant, and $740 thousand who died with function. For intestine recipients: $301 thousand for those who survived with a functioning graft and $1 million for those who died with function. For heart recipients: $272 thousand for those who survived with a functioning graft and $1.2 million for those who died with function. For lung recipients: $196 thousand for those who survived with a functioning graft, $642 thousand for those who required retransplant, and $761 thousand for those who died with function.

Prescription opioid use before and after kidney transplant: Implications for posttransplant outcomes.

Evolving literature suggests that the epidemic of prescription opioid use affects the transplant population. We examined a novel database wherein national U.S. transplant registry records were linked to a large pharmaceutical claims warehouse (2007-2015) to characterize prescription opioid use before and after kidney transplant, and associations (adjusted hazard ratio, 95%LCL aHR95%UCL ) with death and graft loss. Among 75 430 eligible patients, 43.1% filled opioids in the year before transplant. Use was more common among recipients who were women, white, unemployed, publicly insured, and with longer pretransplant dialysis. Of those with the highest level of pretransplant opioid use, 60% continued high-level use posttransplant. Pretransplant opioid use had graded associations with one-year posttransplant outcomes; the highest-level use predicted 46% increased risk of death (aHR 1.28 1.461.66 ) and 28% increased risk of all-cause graft failure (aHR 1.17 1.281.41 ). Effects of high-level opioid use in the first year after transplant were stronger, predicting twice the risk of death (aHR 1.93 2.242.60 ) and 68% higher all-cause graft failure risk (aHR 1.50 1.681.89 ) over the subsequent year; increased risk persisted over five years. While associations may, in part, reflect underlying conditions or behaviors, opioid use history is relevant in assessing and providing care to transplant candidates and recipients.

The impact of direct-acting antiviral agents on liver and kidney transplant costs and outcomes.

Direct-acting antiviral medications (DAAs) have revolutionized care for hepatitis C positive (HCV+) liver (LT) and kidney (KT) transplant recipients. Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients registry data were integrated with national pharmaceutical claims (2007-2016) to identify HCV treatments before January 2014 (pre-DAA) and after (post-DAA), stratified by donor (D) and recipient (R) serostatus and payer. Pre-DAA, 18% of HCV+ LT recipients were treated within 3 years and without differences by donor serostatus or payer. Post-DAA, only 6% of D-/R+ recipients, 19.8% of D+/R+ recipients with public insurance, and 11.3% with private insurance were treated within 3 years (P < .0001). LT recipients treated for HCV pre-DAA experienced higher rates of graft loss (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.34 1.852.10 , P < .0001) and death (aHR 1.47 1.681.91 , P < .0001). Post-DAA, HCV treatment was not associated with death (aHR 0.34 0.671.32 , P = .25) or graft failure (aHR 0.32 0.641.26 , P = .20) in D+R+ LT recipients. Treatment increased in D+R+ KT recipients (5.5% pre-DAA vs 12.9% post-DAA), but did not differ by payer status. DAAs reduced the risk of death after D+/R+ KT by 57% (0.19 0.430.95 , P = .04) and graft loss by 46% (0.27 0.541.07 , P = .08). HCV treatment with DAAs appears to improve HCV+ LT and KT outcomes; however, access to these medications appears limited in both LT and KT recipients.

Metformin use in the first year after kidney transplant, correlates, and associated outcomes in diabetic transplant recipients: A retrospective analysis of integrated registry and pharmacy claims data.

While guidelines support metformin as a therapeutic option for diabetic patients with mild-to-moderate renal insufficiency, the frequency and outcomes of metformin use in kidney transplant recipients are not well described. We integrated national U.S. transplant registry data with records from a large pharmaceutical claims clearinghouse (2008-2015). Associations (adjusted hazard ratio, 95% LCL aHR95% UCL ) of diabetes regimens (with and excluding metformin) in the first year post-transplant with patient and graft survival over the subsequent year were quantified by multivariate Cox regression, adjusted for recipient, donor, and transplant factors and propensity for metformin use. Among 14 144 recipients with pretransplant type 2 diabetes mellitus, 4.7% filled metformin in the first year post-transplant; most also received diabetes comedications. Compared to those who received insulin-based regimens without metformin, patients who received metformin were more likely to be female, have higher estimated glomerular filtration rates, and have undergone transplant more recently. Metformin-based regimens were associated with significantly lower adjusted all-cause (aHR 0.18 0.410.91 ), malignancy-related (aHR 0.45 0.450.99 ), and infection-related (aHR 0.12 0.320.85 ) mortality, and nonsignificant trends toward lower cardiovascular mortality, graft failure, and acute rejection. No evidence of increased adverse graft or patient outcomes was noted. Use of metformin-based diabetes treatment regimens may be safe in carefully selected kidney transplant recipients.

The National Landscape of Living Kidney Donor Follow-Up in the United States.

In 2013, the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN)/ United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) mandated that transplant centers collect data on living kidney donors (LKDs) at 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years postdonation, with policy-defined thresholds for the proportion of complete living donor follow-up (LDF) data submitted in a timely manner (60 days before or after the expected visit date). While mandated, it was unclear how centers across the country would perform in meeting thresholds, given potential donor and center-level challenges of LDF. To better understand the impact of this policy, we studied Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients data for 31,615 LKDs between January 2010 and June 2015, comparing proportions of complete and timely LDF form submissions before and after policy implementation. We also used multilevel logistic regression to assess donor- and center-level characteristics associated with complete and timely LDF submissions. Complete and timely 2-year LDF increased from 33% prepolicy (January 2010 through January 2013) to 54% postpolicy (February 2013 through June 2015) (p < 0.001). In an adjusted model, the odds of 2-year LDF increased by 22% per year prepolicy (p < 0.001) and 23% per year postpolicy (p < 0.001). Despite these annual increases in LDF, only 43% (87/202) of centers met the OPTN/UNOS-required 6-month, 1-year, and 2-year LDF thresholds for LKDs who donated in 2013. These findings motivate further evaluation of LDF barriers and the optimal approaches to capturing outcomes after living donation.

OPTN/SRTR 2015 Annual Data Report: Economics.

While the costs to Medicare of solid organ transplants are varied and considerable, the total Medicare expenditure of $4.4 billion for solid organ transplant recipients in 2014 remained less than 1% of all Medicare expenditures. For patients covered by Medicare, the ratio of pre- to posttransplant cost of care varied widely by organ and within some organ categories by patient characteristics. This chapter reports pretransplant costs for all solid organ candidates covered by Medicare to allow investigators to further explore the relative cost of transplant compared with alternative management.

The Changing Financial Landscape of Renal Transplant Practice: A National Cohort Analysis.

Kidney transplantation has become more resource intensive as recipient complexity has increased and average donor quality has diminished over time. A national retrospective cohort study was performed to assess the impact of kidney donor and recipient characteristics on transplant center cost (exclusive of organ acquisition) and Medicare reimbursement. Data from the national transplant registry, University HealthSystem Consortium hospital costs, and Medicare payments for deceased donor (N = 53 862) and living donor (N = 36 715) transplants from 2002 to 2013 were linked and analyzed using multivariate linear regression modeling. Deceased donor kidney transplant costs were correlated with recipient (Expected Post Transplant Survival Score, degree of allosensitization, obesity, cause of renal failure), donor (age, cause of death, donation after cardiac death, terminal creatinine), and transplant (histocompatibility matching) characteristics. Living donor costs rose sharply with higher degrees of allosensitization, and were also associated with obesity, cause of renal failure, recipient work status, and 0-ABDR mismatching. Analysis of Medicare payments for a subsample of 24 809 transplants demonstrated minimal correlation with patient and donor characteristics. In conclusion, the complexity in the landscape of kidney transplantation increases center costs, posing financial disincentives that may reduce organ utilization and limit access for higher-risk populations.

Predonation Prescription Opioid Use: A Novel Risk Factor for Readmission After Living Kidney Donation.

Implications of opioid use in living kidney donors for key outcomes, including readmission rates after nephrectomy, are unknown. We integrated Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients data with records from a nationwide pharmacy claims warehouse and administrative records from an academic hospital consortium to quantify predonation prescription opioid use and postdonation readmission events. Associations of predonation opioid use (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]) in the year before donation and other baseline clinical, procedural, and center factors with readmission within 90 days postdonation were examined by using multivariate logistic regression. Among 14 959 living donors, 11.3% filled one or more opioid prescriptions in the year before donation. Donors with the highest level of predonation opioid use (>305 mg/year) were more than twice as likely as nonusers to be readmitted (6.8% vs. 2.6%; aOR 2.49, 95% confidence interval 1.74-3.58). Adjusted readmission risk was also significantly (p < 0.05) higher for women (aOR = 1.25), African Americans (aOR = 1.45), spouses (aOR = 1.42), exchange participants (aOR = 1.46), uninsured donors (aOR = 1.40), donors with predonation estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 mL/min/1.73 m2 (aOR = 2.68), donors with predonation pulmonary conditions (aOR = 1.54), and after robotic nephrectomy (aOR = 1.68). Predonation opioid use is independently associated with readmission after donor nephrectomy. Future research should examine underlying mechanisms and approaches to reducing risks of postdonation complications.

The Living Donor Collective: A Scientific Registry for Living Donors.

In the setting of an overall decline in living organ donation and new questions about long-term safety, a better understanding of outcomes after living donation has become imperative. Adequate information on outcomes important to donors may take many years to ascertain and may be evident only by comparing large numbers of donors with suitable controls. Previous studies have been unable to fully answer critical questions, primarily due to lack of appropriate controls, inadequate sample size, and/or follow-up duration that is too short to allow detection of important risks attributable to donation. The Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network does not follow donors long term and has no prospective control group with which to compare postdonation outcomes. There is a need to establish a national living donor registry and to prospectively follow donors over their lifetimes. In addition, there is a need to better understand the reasons many potential donors who volunteer to donate do not donate and whether the reasons are justified. Therefore, the US Health Resources and Services Administration asked the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients to establish a national registry to address these important questions. Here, we discuss the efforts, challenges, and opportunities inherent in establishing the Living Donor Collective.

The Incremental Cost of Incompatible Living Donor Kidney Transplantation: A National Cohort Analysis.

Incompatible living donor kidney transplantation (ILDKT) has been established as an effective option for end-stage renal disease patients with willing but HLA-incompatible living donors, reducing mortality and improving quality of life. Depending on antibody titer, ILDKT can require highly resource-intensive procedures, including intravenous immunoglobulin, plasma exchange, and/or cell-depleting antibody treatment, as well as protocol biopsies and donor-specific antibody testing. This study sought to compare the cost and Medicare reimbursement, exclusive of organ acquisition payment, for ILDKT (n = 926) with varying antibody titers to matched compatible transplants (n = 2762) performed between 2002 and 2011. Data were assembled from a national cohort study of ILDKT and a unique data set linking hospital cost accounting data and Medicare claims. ILDKT was more expensive than matched compatible transplantation, ranging from 20% higher adjusted costs for positive on Luminex assay but negative flow cytometric crossmatch, 26% higher for positive flow cytometric crossmatch but negative cytotoxic crossmatch, and 39% higher for positive cytotoxic crossmatch (p < 0.0001 for all). ILDKT was associated with longer median length of stay (12.9 vs. 7.8 days), higher Medicare payments ($91 330 vs. $63 782 p < 0.0001), and greater outlier payments. In conclusion, ILDKT increases the cost of and payments for kidney transplantation.

Recipient Outcomes Following Transplantation of Allografts From Live Kidney Donors Who Subsequently Developed End-Stage Renal Disease.

Live kidney donors have an increased risk of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) compared with nondonors; however, it is unknown whether undetected, subclinical kidney disease exists at donation that subsequently contributes to this risk. To indirectly test this hypothesis, the authors followed the donated kidneys, by comparing the outcomes of 257 recipients whose donors subsequently developed ESRD with a matched cohort whose donors remained ESRD free. The compared recipients were matched on donor (age, sex, race/ethnicity, donor-recipient relationship), transplant (HLA mismatch, peak panel-reactive antibody, previous transplantation, year of transplantation), and recipient (age, sex, race/ethnicity, body mass index, cause of ESRD, and time on dialysis) risk factors. Median recipient follow-up was 12.5 years (interquartile range 7.4-17.9, maximum 20 years). Recipients of allografts from donors who developed ESRD had increased death-censored graft loss (74% versus 56% at 20 years; adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.7; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.5-2.0; p < 0.001) and mortality (61% versus 46% at 20 years; aHR 1.5; 95% CI 1.2-1.8; p < 0.001) compared with matched recipients of allografts from donors who did not develop ESRD. This association was similar among related, spousal, and unrelated nonspousal donors. These findings support a novel view of the mechanisms underlying donor ESRD: that of pre-donation kidney disease. However, biopsy data may be required to confirm this hypothesis.

Patterns of End-Stage Renal Disease Caused by Diabetes, Hypertension, and Glomerulonephritis in Live Kidney Donors.

Inferences about late risk of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) in live kidney donors have been extrapolated from studies averaging <10 years of follow-up. Because early (<10 years) and late (≥10 years) postdonation ESRD may differ by causal mechanism, it is possible that extrapolations are misleading. To better understand postdonation ESRD, we studied patterns of common etiologies including diabetes, hypertension and glomerulonephritis (GN; as reported by providers) using donor registry data linked to ESRD registry data. Overall, 125 427 donors were observed for a median of 11.0 years (interquartile range 5.3-15.7 years; maximum 25 years). The cumulative incidence of ESRD increased from 10 events per 10 000 at 10 years after donation to 85 events per 10 000 at 25 years after donation (late vs. early ESRD, adjusted for age, race and sex: incidence rate ratio [IRR] 1.3 1.72.3 [subscripts are 95% confidence intervals]). Early postdonation ESRD was predominantly reported as GN-ESRD; however, late postdonation ESRD was more frequently reported as diabetic ESRD and hypertensive ESRD (IRR 2.3 7.725.2 and 1.4 2.64.6 , respectively). These time-dependent patterns were not seen with GN-ESRD (IRR 0.4 0.71.2 ). Because ESRD in live kidney donors has traditionally been reported in studies averaging <10 years of follow-up, our findings suggest caution in extrapolating such results over much longer intervals.

National Variation in Use of Immunosuppression for Kidney Transplantation: A Call for Evidence-Based Regimen Selection.

Immunosuppression management in kidney transplantation has evolved to include an increasingly diverse choice of medications. Although informed by patient and donor characteristics, choice of immunosuppression regimen varies widely across transplant programs. Using a novel database integrating national transplant registry and pharmacy fill records, immunosuppression use at 6-12 and 12-24 mo after transplant was evaluated for 22 453 patients transplanted in 249 U.S. programs in 2005-2010. Use of triple immunosuppression comprising tacrolimus, mycophenolic acid or azathioprine, and steroids varied widely (0-100% of patients per program), as did use of steroid-sparing regimens (0-77%), sirolimus-based regimens (0-100%) and cyclosporine-based regimens (0-78%). Use of triple therapy was more common in highly sensitized patients, women and recipients with dialysis duration >5 years. Sirolimus use appeared to diminish over the study period. Patient and donor characteristics explained only a limited amount of the observed variation in regimen use, whereas center choice explained 30-46% of the use of non-triple-therapy immunosuppression. The majority of patients who received triple-therapy (79%), cyclosporine-based (87.6%) and sirolimus-based (84.3%) regimens continued them in the second year after transplant. This population-based study of immunosuppression practice demonstrates substantial variation in center practice beyond that explained by differences in patient and donor characteristics.

Economics.

While the costs to Medicare of solid organ transplants are varied and considerable, the total Medicare expenditure of $4.2 billion for solid organ transplant recipients in 2013 remains less than 1% of all Medicare expenditures. Kidney transplant remains one of the most cost-effective surgical interventions in medicine and exhibits a rare feature in that it is generally known to be cost-saving in the long term. For patients covered by Medicare, lung transplant is one of the more costly solid organ transplants performed. This chapter reports pretransplant costs for lung candidates to allow investigators to further explore the relative cost of lung transplant compared with alternative management.

Estimated GFR for Living Kidney Donor Evaluation.

All living kidney donor candidates undergo evaluation of GFR. Guidelines recommend measured GFR (mGFR), using either an endogenous filtration marker or creatinine clearance, rather than estimated GFR (eGFR), but measurement methods are difficult, time consuming and costly. We investigated whether GFR estimated from serum creatinine (eGFRcr) with or without sequential cystatin C is sufficiently accurate to identify donor candidates with high probability that mGFR is above or below thresholds for clinical decision making. We combined the pretest probability for mGFR thresholds <60, <70, ≥80, and ≥90 mL/min per 1.73 m(2) based on demographic characteristics (from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey) with test performance of eGFR (categorical likelihood ratios from the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration) to compute posttest probabilities. Using data from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients, 53% of recent living donors had predonation eGFRcr high enough to ensure ≥95% probability that predonation mGFR was ≥90 mL/min per 1.73 m(2) , suggesting that mGFR may not be necessary in a large proportion of donor candidates. We developed a Web-based application to compute the probability, based on eGFR, that mGFR for a donor candidate is above or below a range of thresholds useful in living donor evaluation and selection.

Economic Impacts of ABO-Incompatible Live Donor Kidney Transplantation: A National Study of Medicare-Insured Recipients.

The infrequent use of ABO-incompatible (ABOi) kidney transplantation in the United States may reflect concern about the costs of necessary preconditioning and posttransplant care. Medicare data for 26 500 live donor kidney transplant recipients (2000 to March 2011), including 271 ABOi and 62 A2-incompatible (A2i) recipients, were analyzed to assess the impact of pretransplant, transplant episode and 3-year posttransplant costs. The marginal costs of ABOi and A2i versus ABO-compatible (ABOc) transplants were quantified by multivariate linear regression including adjustment for recipient, donor and transplant factors. Compared with ABOc transplantation, patient survival (93.2% vs. 88.15%, p = 0.0009) and death-censored graft survival (85.4% vs. 76.1%, p < 0.05) at 3 years were lower after ABOi transplant. The average overall cost of the transplant episode was significantly higher for ABOi ($65 080) compared with A2i ($36 752) and ABOc ($32 039) transplantation (p < 0.001), excluding organ acquisition. ABOi transplant was associated with high adjusted posttransplant spending (marginal costs compared to ABOc - year 1: $25 044; year 2: $10 496; year 3: $7307; p < 0.01). ABOi transplantation provides a clinically effective method to expand access to transplantation. Although more expensive, the modest increases in total spending are easily justified by avoiding long-term dialysis and its associated morbidity and cost.

The Impact of Redistricting Proposals on Health Care Expenditures for Liver Transplant Candidates and Recipients.

Redistricting, which means sharing organs in novel districts developed through mathematical optimization, has been proposed to reduce pervasive geographic disparities in access to liver transplantation. The economic impact of redistricting was evaluated with two distinct data sources, Medicare claims and the University HealthSystem Consortium (UHC). We estimated total Medicare payments under (i) the current allocation system (Share 35), (ii) full regional sharing, (iii) an eight-district plan, and (iv) a four-district plan for a simulated population of patients listed for liver transplant over 5 years, using the liver simulated allocation model. The model predicted 5-year transplant volumes (Share 35, 29,267; regional sharing, 29,005; eight districts, 29,034; four districts, 28,265) and a reduction in overall mortality, including listed and posttransplant patients, of up to 676 lives. Compared with current allocation, the eight-district plan was estimated to reduce payments for pretransplant care ($1638 million to $1506 million, p < 0.001), transplant episode ($5607 million to $5569 million, p < 0.03) and posttransplant care ($479 million to $488 million, p < 0.001). The eight-district plan was estimated to increase per-patient transportation costs for organs ($8988 to $11,874 per patient, p < 0.001) and UHC estimated hospital costs ($4699 per case). In summary, redistricting appears to be potentially cost saving for the health care system but will increase the cost of performing liver transplants for some transplant centers.