Does Failure to Rescue Drive Race/Ethnicity-based Disparities in Survival After Heart Transplantation?

OBJECTIVE: The objective was to assess whether race/ethnicity is an independent predictor of failure to rescue (FTR) after orthotopic heart transplantation (OHT). SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Outcomes following OHT vary by patient level factors; for example, non-White patients have worse outcomes than White patients after OHT. Failure to rescue is an important factor associated with cardiac surgery outcomes, but its relationship to demographic factors is unknown. METHODS: Using the United Network for Organ Sharing database, we included all adult patients who underwent primary isolated OHT between 1/1/2006 snd 6/30/2021. FTR was defined as the inability to prevent mortality after at least one of the UNOS-designated postoperative complications. Donor, recipient, and transplant characteristics, including complications and FTR, were compared across race/ethnicity. Logistic regression models were created to identify factors associated with complications and FTR. Kaplan Meier and adjusted Cox proportional hazards models evaluated the association between race/ethnicity and posttransplant survival. RESULTS: There were 33,244 adult, isolated heart transplant recipients included: the distribution of race/ethnicity was 66% (n=21,937) White, 21.2% (7,062) Black, 8.3% (2,768) Hispanic, and 3.3% (1,096) Asian. The frequency of complications and FTR differed significantly by race/ethnicity. After adjustment, Hispanic recipients were more likely to experience FTR than White recipients (OR 1.327, 95% CI[1.075-1.639], P =0.02). Black recipients had lower 5-year survival compared with other races/ethnicities (HR 1.276, 95% CI[1.207-1.348], P <0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: In the US, Black recipients have an increased risk of mortality after OHT compared with White recipients, without associated differences in FTR. In contrast, Hispanic recipients have an increased likelihood of FTR, but no significant mortality difference compared with White recipients. These findings highlight the need for tailored approaches to addressing race/ethnicity-based health inequities in the practice of heart transplantation.

Late onset atrial fibrillation in patients undergoing surgical aortic valve replacement.

OBJECTIVE: Aortic valve disease is a risk factor for atrial fibrillation (AF), and AF is associated with increased late mortality and morbidity after cardiac surgery. The evolution of alternative approaches to AF prophylaxis, including less invasive technologies and medical therapies, has altered the balance between risk and potential benefit for prophylactic intervention at the time of surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). Such interventions impose incremental risk, however, making an understanding of predictors of new onset AF that persists beyond the perioperative episode relevant. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective single-institution cohort analysis of patients undergoing SAVR with no history of preoperative AF (n = 1014). These patients were cross-referenced against an institutional electrocardiogram (ECG) database to identify those with ECGs 3-12 months after surgery. Logistic regression was used to identify predictors of late AF. RESULTS: Among the 401 patients (40%), who had ECGs in our institution 3-12 months after surgery, 16 (4%) had late AF. Patients with late AF were older than patients without late AF (73 vs. 65, p = .025), and underwent procedures that were more urgent/emergent (38% vs. 15%, p = .015), with higher predicted risk of mortality (2.2% vs. 1.3%, p = .012). Predictors associated with the development of late AF were advanced age, higher preoperative creatinine level and urgent/emergent surgery. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of late AF 3-12 months after SAVR, is low. Prophylactic AF interventions at the time of SAVR may not be warranted.

One Year Outcomes Following Transplantation with COVID-19-Positive Donor Hearts: A National Database Cohort Study.

The current understanding of the safety of heart transplantation from COVID-19+ donors is uncertain. Preliminary studies suggest that heart transplants from these donors may be feasible. We analyzed 1-year outcomes in COVID-19+ donor heart recipients using 1:3 propensity matching. The OPTN database was queried for adult heart transplant recipients between 1 January 2020 and 30 September 2022. COVID-19+ donors were defined as those who tested positive on NATs or antigen tests within 21 days prior to procurement. Multiorgan transplants, retransplants, donors without COVID-19 testing, and recipients allocated under the old heart allocation system were excluded. A total of 7211 heart transplant recipients met the inclusion criteria, including 316 COVID-19+ donor heart recipients. Further, 290 COVID-19+ donor heart recipients were matched to 870 COVID-19- donor heart recipients. Survival was similar between the groups at 30 days (p = 0.46), 6 months (p = 0.17), and 1 year (p = 0.07). Recipients from COVID-19+ donors in the matched cohort were less likely to experience postoperative acute rejection prior to discharge (p = 0.01). National COVID-19+ donor heart usage varied by region: region 11 transplanted the most COVID-19+ hearts (15.8%), and region 6 transplanted the fewest (3.2%). Our findings indicate that COVID-19+ heart transplantation can be performed with safe early outcomes. Further analyses are needed to determine if long-term outcomes are equivalent between groups.

The Public Health Service "Increased Risk" 2020 Policy Change Has not Improved Organ Utilization in the United States: A Nationwide Cohort Study.

Objective: To assess the effects of the 2020 United States Public Health Service (PHS) "Increased Risk" Guidelines update. Background: Donors labeled as "Increased Risk" for transmission of infectious diseases have been found to have decreased organ utilization rates despite no significant impact on recipient survival. Recently, the PHS provided an updated guideline focused on "Increased Risk" organ donors, which included the removal of the "Increased Risk" label and the elimination of the separate informed consent form, although the actual increased risk status of donors is still ultimately transmitted to transplant physicians. We sought to analyze the effect of this update on organ utilization rates. Methods: This was a retrospective analysis of the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network database which compared donor organ utilization in the 2 years before the June 2020 PHS Guideline update for increased-risk donor organs (June 2018-May 2020) versus the 2 years after the update (August 2020-July 2022). The organ utilization rate for each donor was determined by dividing the number of organs transplanted by the total number of organs available for procurement. Student t test and multivariable logistic regression models were used for analysis. Results: There were 17,272 donors in the preupdate cohort and 17,922 donors in the postupdate cohort; of these, 4,977 (28.8%) and 3,893 (21.7%) donors were considered "Increased Risk", respectively. There was a 2% decrease in overall organ utilization rates after the update, driven by a 3% decrease in liver utilization rates and a 2% decrease in lung utilization rates. After multivariable adjustment, donors in the postupdate cohort had 10% decreased odds of having all organs transplanted. Conclusions: The 2020 PHS "Increased Risk" Donor Guideline update was not associated with an increase in organ utilization rates in the first 2 years after its implementation, despite a decrease in the proportion of donors considered to be at higher risk. Further efforts to educate the community on the safe usage of high-risk organs are needed and may increase organ utilization.

Racial Disparities in Coronavirus Disease 2019 Mortality Are Present in Heart Transplant Recipients.

BACKGROUND: Studies have demonstrated the devastating effects of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on vulnerable populations. Although they receive close follow-up, heart transplant recipients represent a particularly vulnerable population, given long-term immunosuppression and comorbid conditions. We sought to investigate the association between race/ethnicity and the probability of death due to COVID-19 in adult heart transplant recipients in the United States. METHODS: Adult isolated heart transplant recipients were identified using the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network database. Recipients who were described as deceased or lost to follow-up before January 2020 were excluded. Recipients were stratified into 4 cohorts by race/ethnicity. The primary outcome of interest was death due to COVID-19. RESULTS: A total of 22 157 adult recipients were identified. During the course of follow-up, 153 recipients had COVID-19 reported as the primary cause of death. COVID-19 mortality was significantly different between race/ethnicity cohorts (Black, n = 34 [0.79%]; Hispanic, n = 23 [1.33%]; White, n = 92 [0.60%]; other, n = 4 [0.44%]; P = .007). COVID-19 was listed as a contributing cause of mortality in 0.12% of Black, 0.23% of Hispanic, 0.04% of White, and 0.33% of other recipients (P = .002). No significant difference in non-COVID mortality or all-cause mortality was observed. After multivariable adjustment, Black (hazard ratio, 2.78 [1.40-5.52]; P = .003) and Hispanic (hazard ratio, 3.92 [1.88-8.16]; P < .001) recipients were at higher risk of death due to COVID-19 compared with White recipients. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with White recipients, Black and Hispanic recipients experienced higher rates of COVID-19 mortality after transplantation. These findings suggest that racial/ethnic disparities of COVID-19 mortality in the general population persist in adult heart transplant recipients.

Multidisciplinary team approach to confront the challenge of drug use-associated infective endocarditis.

OBJECTIVES: Drug use-associated infective endocarditis is a rapidly growing clinical problem. Although operative outcomes are generally satisfactory, reinfection secondary to recurrent substance use is distressingly common, negatively affects long-term survival, generates practical and ethical challenges, and creates potential conflict among care team members. We established a Drug Use Endocarditis Treatment team including surgeons, infectious disease, and addiction medicine experts specifically focused on the unique complexities of drug use-associated infective endocarditis. METHODS: We reviewed the impact of Drug Use Endocarditis Treatment team involvement on quantitative measures of quality of care, including length of stay, time to addiction medicine consultation, time to surgery, and discharge on appropriate medications for opioid use disorder, as well as operative mortality. Standard statistical tests were used, including the Fisher exact test, t test, and Wilcoxon rank-sum test. Qualitative assessment was made of the impact on clinicians, including communication and mutual understanding. RESULTS: Comparing the pre-Drug Use Endocarditis Treatment cohort with the post-Drug Use Endocarditis Treatment cohort, patients in the post-Drug Use Endocarditis Treatment cohort who underwent surgery had a significantly lower time from admission to addiction medicine consultation (3.8 vs 1.0 days P < .001) and clinically relevant increase in discharge on medications for opioid use disorder (48% vs 67% P = .35). Additionally, involved members of the team thought communication was improved. CONCLUSIONS: The Drug Use Endocarditis Treatment team improved engagement with addiction medicine consultation and appropriate discharge care. Given the impact of relapse of injection drug use on long-term outcomes, interventions such as this offer potentially powerful tools for the treatment of this complex patient population.

Is Transplantation With Coronavirus Disease 2019-Positive Donor Lungs Safe? A US Nationwide Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Since the beginning of the pandemic, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has caused debilitating lung failure in many patients. Practitioners have understandably been hesitant to use lungs from donors with COVID-19 for transplantation. This study aimed to analyze the characteristics and short-term outcomes of lung transplantation from donors with recent positive COVID-19 testing results. METHODS: Lung transplantations performed between January 2020 and June 2022 were queried from the United Network for Organ Sharing database. Pediatric, multiorgan, and repeat lung transplantations were excluded. Propensity scoring matched recipients of lungs from donors with recent positive COVID-19 testing results to recipients of lungs from donors with negative COVID-19 testing results, and comparisons of 30-day mortality, 3-month mortality, and perioperative outcomes were performed. RESULTS: A total of 5270 patients underwent lung transplantation during the study dates, including 51 patients who received lungs from donors with recent positive COVID-19 testing results. Forty-five recipients of lungs from donors with recent positive COVID-19 testing results were matched with 135 recipients of lungs from donors with negative COVID-19 testing results. After matching, there was no difference in 30-day (log-rank P = .42) and 3-month (log-rank P = .42) mortality. The incidence of other perioperative complications was similar between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: The 30-day and 3-month survival outcomes were similar between recipients of lungs from donors with recent positive COVID-19 testing results and recipients of lungs from donors with negative COVID-19 testing results. This finding suggests that highly selected COVID-19-positive donors without evidence of active infection may be safely considered for lung transplantation. Further studies should explore long-term outcomes to provide reassurance about the safety of this practice.

Multicenter Registry Using Propensity Score Analysis to Compare a Novel Transport/Preservation System to Traditional Means on Postoperative Hospital Outcomes and Costs for Heart Transplant Patients.

The standard method for cardiac allograft preservation for the past 50 years has been static storage using crushed ice. A heart transplant transportation system designed to improve preservation quality with temperature monitoring, the Paragonix SherpaPak Cardiac Transport System (SCTS), was evaluated for its impact on postoperative costs relative to conventional ice storage. Observational US multicenter registry data collected during the August 2015 to November 2021 timeframe from 12 transplant hospitals were analyzed using logistic regression analysis and propensity matching to balance measured baseline covariates and to reduce selection bias. Hospital cost and outcome data post-transplant were then evaluated using various statistical methods. One hundred seventy-four (174) patients were identified resulting in 87 matches. Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. The SCTS group had a significantly lower proportion of ICU days on post-transplant mechanical circulatory support ( p < 0.0001); significantly fewer patients on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation ( p = 0.017); and significantly fewer patients experiencing severe primary graft dysfunction (PGD) ( p = 0.03). Overall hospital plus mechanical circulatory support post-transplant costs were significantly lower by $26.7K in the CTS cohort ( p = 0.03). Use of the SCTS is associated with improved clinical outcomes resulting in significantly lower overall hospital care costs.

Survival after operative repair of acute type A aortic dissection varies according to the presence and type of preoperative malperfusion.

OBJECTIVE: Approximately one-quarter of patients with acute type A aortic dissection (TAAD) present with concomitant malperfusion of coronary arteries, mesenteric circulation, lower extremities, kidneys, brain, and/or coma. It is generally accepted that TAAD patients who present with malperfusion experience higher mortality rates than patients without, although how specific malperfusion syndromes, alone or in combination, affect mortality is not well described. METHODS: The International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection database was queried for patients who underwent surgical repair of TAAD. Patients were stratified according to the presence/absence of malperfusion at presentation. Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate in-hospital mortality according to malperfusion type. Kaplan-Meier estimates were used to estimate 30-day postoperative survival. RESULTS: Six thousand four hundred thirty-seven patients underwent surgical repair of acute TAAD, of whom 2642 (41%) had 1 or more preoperative malperfusion syndromes. Mesenteric malperfusion (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 4.84; P < .001) was associated with the highest odds of in-hospital mortality, followed by coma (AOR, 1.88; P = .007), limb ischemia (AOR, 1.73; P = .008), and coronary malperfusion (AOR, 1.51; P = .02). Renal malperfusion (AOR, 1.37; P = .24) and neurologic deficit (AOR, 1.35; P = .28) were not associated with increased in-hospital mortality. In patients who survived to discharge, there was no difference in 1-year postdischarge survival in the malperfusion and no malperfusion cohorts (P = .36). CONCLUSIONS: Survival during the index admission after TAAD repair varies according to the presence and type of malperfusion syndromes, with mesenteric malperfusion being associated with the highest odds of in-hospital death. Not only the presence of malperfusion but rather specific malperfusion syndromes should be considered when assessing a patient's risk of undergoing TAAD repair.

Hemodynamic and Clinical Performance of Hearts Donated After Circulatory Death.

BACKGROUND: Donor organ demand continues to outpace supply in heart transplantation. Utilization of donation after circulatory death (DCD) hearts could significantly increase heart donor availability for patients with advanced heart failure. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to describe hemodynamic and clinical profiles of DCD hearts in comparison to standard of care (SOC) hearts donated after brain death (DBD). METHODS: This single-center retrospective cohort study of consecutive heart transplant recipients analyzed right heart catheterization measurements, inotrope scores, echocardiograms, and clinical outcomes between DCD and DBD heart recipients. RESULTS: Between April 2016 and February 2022, 47 DCD and 166 SOC hearts were transplanted. Median time from DCD consent to transplant was significantly shorter compared with SOC waiting list time (17 days [6-28 days] vs 70 days [23-240 days]; P < 0.001). Right heart function was significantly impaired in DCD recipients compared with SOC recipients 1 week post-transplant (higher median right atrial pressure (10 mm Hg [8-13 mm Hg] vs 7 mm Hg [5-11 mm Hg]; P < 0.001), higher right atrial pressure to pulmonary capillary wedge pressure ratio (0.64 [0.54-0.82] vs 0.57 [0.43-0.73]; P = 0.016), and lower pulmonary arterial pulsatility index (1.66 [1.27-2.50] vs 2.52 [1.63-3.82]; P < 0.001), but was similar between groups by 3 weeks post-transplant. DCD and SOC recipient mortality was similar at 30 days (DCD 0 vs SOC 2%; P = 0.29) and 1 year post-transplant (DCD 3% vs SOC 8%; P = 0.16). CONCLUSIONS: DCD heart utilization is associated with transient post-transplant right heart dysfunction and short-term clinical outcomes otherwise similar to transplantation using DBD hearts.