Moral Injury: An Unspoken Burden of Transplant Surgery.

Moral injury in healthcare is characterized as the lasting psychological, biological, and social impact on providers which occurs following an adverse patient outcome. Moral injury can contribute to second victim syndrome and lasting psychological harm. While many surgeons face moral injury due to patient acuity and the potential for intraoperative or post operative complications, the transplant ecosystem compounds the impact of moral injury. Institutional blame placed on the transplant surgeon following a post-transplant death or graft loss is magnified by public reporting. Centers whose outcomes fall below threshold levels are subject to regulatory citation and financial loss. Moral injury can also result in risk aversion, limiting access to transplant for higher risk candidates and reduced acceptance of marginal organs hurting donor families. Strategies to increase resilience, reduce accusation and blame, and focus on system quality improvement are vital to mitigate the impact of moral injury on transplant professionals. The transplant community must proactively work to reduce Moral Injury to protect surgeons, ensure access to life saving transplant procedures, and avoid unnecessary organ offer declines.

Subsequent kidney transplant after pediatric heart transplant: Prevalence and risk factors.

Pediatric heart failure and transplantation carry associated risks for kidney failure and potential need for kidney transplant following pediatric heart transplantation (KT/pHT). This retrospective, United Network of Organ Sharing study of 10,030 pediatric heart transplants (pHTs) from 1987 to 2020 aimed to determine the incidence of waitlisting for and completion of KT/pHT, risk factors for KT/pHT, and risk factors for nonreceipt of a KT/pHT. Among pHT recipients, 3.4% were waitlisted for KT/pHT (median time of 14 years after pHT). Among those waitlisted, 70% received a KT/pHT, and 18% died on the waitlist at a median time of 0.8 years from KT/pHT waitlisting (median age of 20 years). Moderate-high sensitization at KT/pHT waitlisting (calculated panel reactive antibody, ≥ 20%) was associated with a lower likelihood of KT/pHT (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.67; 95% confidence interval, 0.47-0.95). Waitlisting for heart transplantation simultaneously with kidney transplant (adjusted hazard ratio, 3.73; 95% confidence interval, 2.01-6.92) was associated with increased risk of death on the KT/pHT waitlist. While the prevalence of KT/pHT is low, there is substantial mortality among those waitlisted for KT/pHT. These findings suggest a need to consider novel risk factors for nonreceipt of KT/pHT and death on the waitlist in prioritizing criteria/guidelines for simultaneous heart-kidney transplantation.

Generating strategies for a national comeback in pancreas transplantation: A Delphi survey and US conference report.

In the United States, potential transplant candidates with insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus are inconsistently offered pancreas transplantation (PTx), contributing to a dramatic decline in pancreas allograft utilization over the past 2 decades. The American Society of Transplantation organized a workshop to identify barriers inhibiting PTx and to develop strategies for a national comeback. The 2-day workshop focused on 4 main topics: (1) referral/candidate selection, (2) organ recovery/utilization, (3) program performance/patient outcomes, and (4) enhanced education/research. Topics were explored through expert presentations, patient testimonials, breakout sessions, and strategic planning, including the identification of tasks for immediate focus. Additionally, a modified-Delphi survey was conducted among workshop members to develop and rate the importance of barriers, and the impact and feasibility of workgroup-identified improvement strategies. The panelists identified 16 barriers to progress and 44 strategies for consideration. The steps for a national comeback in PTx involve greater emphasis on efficient referral and candidate selection, better donor pancreas utilization practices, eliminating financial barriers to procurement and transplant, improving collaboration between transplant and diabetes societies and professionals, and increasing focus on PTx training, education, and research. Partnership between national societies, patient advocacy groups, and professionals will be essential to realizing this critical agenda.

Determining Predictors of Actual Living Kidney Donation Based on Potential Donor Characteristics.

BACKGROUND: Living donor kidney transplantation is the optimal treatment for end-stage kidney disease; however, few living donor candidates (LDCs) who begin evaluation actually donate. While some LDCs are deemed medically ineligible, others discontinue for potentially modifiable reasons. METHODS: At five transplant centers, we conducted a prospective cohort study measuring LDCs' clinical and psychosocial characteristics, educational preparation, readiness to donate, and social determinants of health. We followed LDCs for 12 months after evaluation to determine whether they donated a kidney, opted to discontinue, had modifiable reasons for discontinuing, were medically ineligible, or had other recipient-related reasons for discontinuing. RESULTS: Among 2184 LDCs, 18.6% donated, 38.2% opted to or had modifiable reasons for discontinuing, and 43.2% were deemed ineligible due to medical or recipient-related reasons. Multivariable analyses comparing successful LDCs with those who did not complete donation for modifiable reasons (N = 1241) found that LDCs who discussed donation with the recipient before evaluation (OR, 2.31; 95% CI, 1.54-3.46), had completed high school (OR, 2.01; 95% CI, 1.21-3.35), or were a "close relation" to their recipient (OR, 1.89; 95% CI, 1.33-2.69) were more likely to donate. Conversely, LDCs who reported religion as important (OR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.38-0.80), were Non-White (OR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.49-1.00), or had overall higher anxiety scores (OR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.86-0.99) were less likely to donate. CONCLUSION: With fewer than a fifth of LDCs donating, developing programs to provide greater emotional support and facilitate open discussions between LDCs and recipients earlier may increase living donation rates.

Sociodemographic disparities in sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor use among US kidney transplant recipients: An observational study of real-world pharmacy records.

BACKGROUND: Recent clinical trials demonstrate benefits of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) in patients with chronic kidney disease, but data on use in kidney transplant (KTx) recipients are limited. METHODS: We examined a novel database linking SRTR registry data for KTx recipients (2000-2021) with outpatient fill records from a large pharmaceutical claims warehouse (2015-2021). Adult (≥18 years) KTx recipients treated with SGLT2i were compared to those who received other noninsulin diabetes medications without SGLT2i. Characteristics associated with SGLT2i use were quantified by multivariable logistic regression (adjusted odds ratio, 95%LCLaOR95%UCL). RESULTS: Among 18 988 KTx recipients treated with noninsulin diabetes agents in the study period, 2224 filled an SGLT2i. Mean time from KTx to prescription was 6.7 years for SGLT2i versus 4.7 years for non-SGLT2i medications. SGLT2i use was more common in Asian adults (aOR, 1.091.311.58) and those aged > 30-59 years (compared with 18-30 years) or with BMI > 35 kg/m2 (aOR, 1.191.411.67), and trended higher with self-pay status. SGLT2i use was lower among KTx recipients who were women (aOR, .79.87.96), Black (aOR, .77.881.00) and other (aOR, .52.751.07) race, publicly insured (aOR, .82.921.03), or with less than college education (aOR, .78.87.96), and trended lower in those age 75 years and older. SGLT2i use in KTx patients increased dramatically in 2019-2021 (aOR, 5.015.636.33 vs. prior years). CONCLUSION: SGLT2i use is increasing in KTx recipients but varies with factors including race, education, and insurance. While ongoing study is needed to define risks and benefits of SGLT2i use in KTx patients, attention should also focus on reducing treatment disparities related to sociodemographic traits.

Emerging Evidence on Coronary Heart Disease Screening in Kidney and Liver Transplantation Candidates: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association: Endorsed by the American Society of Transplantation.

Coronary heart disease is an important source of mortality and morbidity among kidney transplantation and liver transplantation candidates and recipients and is driven by traditional and nontraditional risk factors related to end-stage organ disease. In this scientific statement, we review evidence from the past decade related to coronary heart disease screening and management for kidney and liver transplantation candidates. Coronary heart disease screening in asymptomatic kidney and liver transplantation candidates has not been demonstrated to improve outcomes but is common in practice. Risk stratification algorithms based on the presence or absence of clinical risk factors and physical performance have been proposed, but a high proportion of candidates still meet criteria for screening tests. We suggest new approaches to pretransplantation evaluation grounded on the presence or absence of known coronary heart disease and cardiac symptoms and emphasize multidisciplinary engagement, including involvement of a dedicated cardiologist. Noninvasive functional screening methods such as stress echocardiography and myocardial perfusion scintigraphy have limited accuracy, and newer noninvasive modalities, especially cardiac computed tomography-based tests, are promising alternatives. Emerging evidence such as results of the 2020 International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness With Medical and Invasive Approaches-Chronic Kidney Disease trial emphasizes the vital importance of guideline-directed medical therapy in managing diagnosed coronary heart disease and further questions the value of revascularization among asymptomatic kidney transplantation candidates. Optimizing strategies to disseminate and implement best practices for medical management in the broader end-stage organ disease population should be prioritized to improve cardiovascular outcomes in these populations.

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.

Time to discard the term "discard".

The 2022 Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients Consensus Conference "People Driven Transplant Metrics" offered an opportunity for a diverse group of stakeholders in the solid organ transplant community to exchange ideas about what information and metrics are important to different stakeholders. Participating patients and family members called on the transplant community to cease using the term "discards" to refer to donated organs that are not transplanted.

Stakeholders' perspectives on transplant metrics: the 2022 Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients' consensus conference.

In July 2022, the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) hosted an innovative, multistakeholder consensus conference to identify information and metrics desired by stakeholders in the transplantation system, including patients, living donors, caregivers, deceased donor family members, transplant professionals, organ procurement organization professionals, payers, and regulators. Crucially, patients, caregivers, living donors, and deceased donor family members were included in all aspects of this conference, including serving on the planning committee, participating in preconference focus groups and learning sessions, speaking at the conference, moderating conference sessions and breakout groups, and shaping the conclusions. Patients constituted 24% of the meeting participants. In this report, we document the proceedings and enumerate 160 recommendations, 10 of which have been highly prioritized. SRTR will use the recommendations to develop new presentations of information and metrics requested by stakeholders to support informed decision-making.

Immune tolerance via FCR001 cell therapy compared with maintenance immunosuppression for kidney transplantation: Real-world evidence analysis of safety and efficacy.

While kidney transplantation (KTx) has traditionally required lifelong immunosuppression, an investigational stem cell therapy, FCR001, has been demonstrated to induce tolerance and eliminate the need for immunosuppression through the establishment of persistent mixed chimerism in a phase 2 clinical study. Real-world evidence (RWE) methods were employed to compare the safety and efficacy of non-myeloablative conditioning with FCR001 with standard of care [SOC] immunosuppression in a retrospective single-center analysis of outcomes among propensity score matched living-donor KTx receiving SOC (n = 144) or FCR001 (n = 36). Among the FCR001 recipients, 26 (72%) developed persistent chimerism allowing durable elimination of all immunosuppression. There was no significant difference in the composite primary endpoint (biopsy-proven acute rejection [BPAR], graft loss, or death) at 60 months (FCR001 27.8%, n = 10 and SOC 28.5%, n = 41; p = .9). FCR001 recipients demonstrated superior kidney function at 5 years (estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] [mean ± standard deviation]: 64.1 ± 15.3) compared to SOC (51.7 ± 18.8; p = .02). At 5 years, FCR001 recipients experienced fewer complications including new-onset diabetes post-transplant, although two patients developed graft versus host disease. In conclusion, RWE demonstrated that KTx combined with non-myeloablative conditioning and FCR001 resulting in superior kidney function without increasing the risk of rejection, graft loss, or death among patients off immunosuppression.

Variation in adult living donor liver transplantation in the United States: Identifying opportunities for increased utilization.

In the United States, living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is limited to transplant centers with specific experience. However, the impact of recipient characteristics on procedure selection (LDLT vs. deceased donor liver transplant [DDLT]) within these centers has not been described. Transplant registry data for centers that performed ≥1 LDLT in 2002-2019 were analyzed using hierarchal regression modeling to quantify the impact of patient and center factors on the adjusted odds ratio (aOR) of LDLT (vs DDLT). Among 73,681 adult recipients, only 4% underwent LDLT, varying from <1% to >60% of total liver transplants. After risk adjustment, the likelihood of receiving an LDLT rose by 73% in recent years (aOR 1.73 for 2014-2019 vs. 2002-2007) but remained lower for older adults, men, racial and ethnic minorities, and obese patients. LDLT was less commonly used in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma or alcoholic cirrhosis, and more frequently in those with hepatitis C and with lower severity of illness (Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score < 15). Patients with public insurance, lower educational achievement, and residence in the Northwest and Southeast had decreased access. While some differences in access to LDLT reflect clinical factors, further exploration into disparities in LDLT utilization based on center practice and socioeconomic determinants of health is needed.

Factors enabling transplant program participation in the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) Living Donor Collective: A national survey.

BACKGROUND: The Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) Living Donor Collective (LDC), the first effort to create a lifetime registry for living donor candidates in the United States, requires transplant programs to register donor candidates while the SRTR conducts follow-up. METHODS: To better understand facilitators and barriers to program participation, we conducted a brief electronic survey of U.S. transplant program staff from October 26, 2021 to December 17, 2021. RESULTS: We received 132 responses, with at least one response from 87 living donor programs (46 kidney programs, 33 kidney and liver programs, and eight liver programs alone). We found 86% of program representatives strongly agreed or agreed that funding adequate to cover the cost of data collection would facilitate LDC participation, 92% agreed or strongly agreed with importance of electronic data submission options, and 74% reported that elimination of requirements to submit duplicative pre-operative information to the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) would be helpful. Other potentially enabling factors include reduction in duration of OPTN postdonation follow-up requirements, ease-of-use, protection from data use for regulation, adequate data security, and equity in data access. CONCLUSION: This survey identifies potential targets to strengthen participation in the effort to create a national living donor registry in the United States. Collaboration and investment to overcome barriers to LDC participation among transplant programs are vital to generate long-term data on living donation for donor candidates, donors, and patients in need of transplant.

Clinical outcomes from the Assessing Donor-derived cell-free DNA Monitoring Insights of kidney Allografts with Longitudinal surveillance (ADMIRAL) study.

The use of routine monitoring of donor-derived cell-free DNA (dd-cfDNA) after kidney transplant may allow clinicians to identify subclinical allograft injury and intervene prior to development of clinically evident graft injury. To evaluate this, data from 1092 kidney transplant recipients monitored for dd-cfDNA over a three-year period was analyzed to assess the association of dd-cfDNA with histologic evidence of allograft rejection. Elevation of dd-cfDNA (0.5% or more) was significantly correlated with clinical and subclinical allograft rejection. dd-cfDNA values of 0.5% or more were associated with a nearly three-fold increase in risk development of de novo donor-specific antibodies (hazard ratio 2.71) and were determined to be elevated a median of 91 days (interquartile range of 30-125 days) ahead of donor specific antibody identification. Persistently elevated dd-cfDNA (more than one result above the 0.5% threshold) predicted over a 25% decline in the estimated glomerular filtration rate over three years (hazard ratio 1.97). Therefore, routine monitoring of dd-cfDNA allowed early identification of clinically important graft injury. Biomarker monitoring complemented histology and traditional laboratory surveillance strategies as a prognostic marker and risk-stratification tool post-transplant. Thus, persistently low dd-cfDNA levels may accurately identify allograft quiescence or absence of injury, paving the way for personalization of immunosuppression trials.

Survey of current transplant center practices regarding COVID-19 vaccine mandates in the United States.

An electronic survey canvassing current policies of transplant centers regarding a COVID-19 vaccine mandate for transplant candidates and living donors was distributed to clinicians at US solid organ transplant centers performing transplants from October 14, 2021-November 15, 2021. Responses were received from staff at 141 unique transplant centers. These respondents represented 56.4% of US transplant centers, and responding centers performed 78.5% of kidney transplants and 82.4% of liver transplants in the year prior to survey administration. Only 35.7% of centers reported implementing a vaccine mandate, while 60.7% reported that vaccination was not required. A minority (42%) of responding centers with a vaccine mandate for transplant candidates also mandated vaccination for living organ donors. Centers with a vaccine mandate most frequently cited clinical evidence supporting the efficacy of pre-transplant vaccination (82%) and stewardship obligations to ensure organs were transplanted into the lowest risk patients (64%). Centers without a vaccine mandate cited a variety of reasons including administrative, equity, and legal considerations for their decision. Transplant centers in the United States exhibit significant heterogeneity in COVID-19 vaccination mandate policies for transplant candidates. While all centers encourage vaccination, most centers have not mandated COVID-19 vaccination for candidates and living donors, citing administrative opposition, legal prohibitions, and concern about equity in access to transplants.

Toward continuous improvement of Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients performance reporting: Advances following 2012 consensus conference and future consensus building for 2022 consensus conference.

The Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) held a consensus conference in 2012 that examined methods used by SRTR for constructing performance metrics and made recommendations on how to improve program-specific reports. That consensus conference provided 25 recommendations categorized as follows: statistical methods, risk adjustment, and outcomes and data. During the subsequent decade, SRTR has implemented most of these recommendations; these are described in this article along with plans for another consensus conference in 2022. With the present article, SRTR aims to create transparency in the field of transplant metrics and guide discussion in the planning of the next consensus conference in 2022. The new conference will revisit the previous topics and have a broader focus to improve the metrics and information that SRTR provides. Readers can provide feedback on topics to be discussed at the next consensus conference as early as possible, by emailing srtr@srtr.org with the subject line "Task 5 Public Comment."

The need for integrated clinical and administrative data models for risk adjustment in assessment of the cost transplant care.

INTRODUCTION: Value-based purchasing requires accurate techniques to appropriately measure both outcomes and cost with robust adjustment for differences in severity of illness. Traditional methods to adjust cost estimates have exclusively used administrative data derived from billing claims to identify comorbidity and complications. Transplantation uniquely has accurate national clinical registry data that can be used to supplement administrative data. METHODS: Administrative claims from the Vizient, Inc, Clinical Data Base (CDB) were linked with clinical records from the Scientific Registry for Transplant Recipients for 76 liver and 109 kidney transplant programs. Using either or both datasets, we fitted a regression model to the total direct cost of care for 16,649 kidney and 6058 liver transplants. RESULTS: The proportion of variation explained by these risk-adjustment models increased significantly when combined administrative and clinical data were used for kidney (administrative only R2 = .069, clinical only R2 = .047, combined R2 = .14, p < .0001) and liver (administrative only R2 = .28, clinical only R2 = .25, combined R2 = .33, p < .0001). CONCLUSION: Incorporating accurate clinical data into risk-adjustment methodologies can improve risk adjustment methodologies; however, as majority of variation in cost remains unexplained by these risk-adjustment models further work is needed to accuracy assess transplant value.

A Roadmap for Innovation to Advance Transplant Access and Outcomes: A Position Statement From the National Kidney Foundation.

Over the past 65 years, kidney transplantation has evolved into the optimal treatment for patients with kidney failure, dramatically reducing suffering through improved survival and quality of life. However, access to transplant is still limited by organ supply, opportunities for transplant are inequitably distributed, and lifelong transplant survival remains elusive. To address these persistent needs, the National Kidney Foundation convened an expert panel to define an agenda for future research. The key priorities identified by the panel center on the needs to develop and evaluate strategies to expand living donation, improve waitlist management and transplant readiness, maximize use of available deceased donor organs, and extend allograft longevity. Strategies targeting the critical goal of decreasing organ discard that warrant research investment include educating patients and clinicians about potential benefits of accepting nonstandard organs, use of novel organ assessment technologies and real-time decision support, and approaches to preserve and resuscitate allografts before implantation. The development of personalized strategies to reduce the burden of lifelong immunosuppression and support "one transplant for life" was also identified as a vital priority. The panel noted the specific goal of improving transplant access and graft survival for children with kidney failure. This ambitious agenda will focus research investment to promote greater equity and efficiency in access to transplantation, and help sustain long-term benefits of the gift of life for more patients in need.

Comparative Effectiveness of Risk-adjusted Cumulative Sum and Periodic Evaluation for Monitoring Hospital Perioperative Mortality.

BACKGROUND: National surgical quality improvement (QI) programs use periodic, risk-adjusted evaluation to identify hospitals with higher than expected perioperative mortality. Rapid, accurate identification of poorly performing hospitals is critical for avoiding potentially preventable mortality and represents an opportunity to enhance QI efforts. METHODS: Hospital-level analysis using Veterans Affairs (VA) Surgical Quality Improvement Program data (2011-2016) to compare identification of hospitals with excess, risk-adjusted 30-day mortality using observed-to-expected (O-E) ratios (ie, current gold standard) and cumulative sum (CUSUM) with V-mask. Various V-mask slopes and radii were evaluated-slope of 2.5 and radius of 1.0 was used as the base case. RESULTS: Hospitals identified by CUSUM and quarterly O-E were identified midway into a quarter [median 47 days; interquartile range (IQR): 24-61 days before quarter end] translating to a median of 129 (IQR: 60-187) surgical cases and 368 (IQR: 145-681) postoperative inpatient days occurring after a CUSUM signal, but before the quarter end. At hospitals identified by CUSUM but not O-E, a median of 2 deaths within a median of 5 days triggered a signal. In some cases, these clusters extended beyond CUSUM identification date with as many as 8 deaths undetected using O-E. Sensitivity and negative predictive values for CUSUM relative to O-E were 71.9% (95% confidence interval: 66.2%-77.1%) and 95.5% (94.4%-96.4%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: CUSUM evaluation identifies hospitals with clusters of mortality in excess of expected more rapidly than periodic analysis. CUSUM represents an analytic tool national QI programs could utilize to provide participating hospitals with data that could facilitate more proactive implementation of local interventions to help reduce potentially avoidable perioperative mortality.

Using race to estimate glomerular filtration and its impact in kidney transplantation.

Since direct measurement of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) is time-consuming and more expensive, estimated GFR (eGFR) based on measured laboratory values is widely used to determine kidney function. Commonly used formulae to calculate eGFR are dependent on variables, which include filtration markers like serum creatinine and patient characteristics including race. Medical algorithms which utilize race are increasingly being scrutinized, as race is recognized to be a social construct rather than a biologic one. eGFR calculations have important implications for kidney transplantation, both in the listing of candidates as well as in the evaluation of potential kidney donors. This review considers the specific implications of race-based eGFR calculations on recipient evaluation and on decisions related to living kidney donation. We suggest a potential policy solution to ensure that racial and ethnic minority patients are not disadvantaged by eGFR as a result of current calculation methods.

Best practice recommendations for the use of hepatitis C viremic donor organs for hepatitis C virus naïve recipients.

The combination of the transplant organ deficit, the increase in HCV nucleic acid positive donors (HCV NAT+), and the development of direct-acting antiviral agents (DAAs) has resulted in a rapid increase in HCV NAT+ organ transplants into HCV naïve recipients. Early clinical experience with HCV NAT+ donor organs has shown promising outcomes; however, best practices are lacking to guide transplant programs during all phases of patient care. Transplant programs developing protocols for the utilization of HCV NAT+ organs will need a multidisciplinary team to address all aspects of pre-transplant and post-transplant patient care. Reports of fibrosing cholestatic hepatitis in HCV NAT+ organ transplant recipients receiving delayed DAA initiation highlight the need for the transplant community to develop safe and effective protocols. A failure to do so will inevitably lead to the erosion of public trust from cases of missed or inadequately treated donor-derived HCV infections. Herein, we provide best practice guidelines for the utilization of HCV NAT+ organs into HCV-negative recipients based on literature review and expert opinion from the faculty of the ASTS Standards and Quality Committee.