Improved waitlist and comparable post-transplant outcomes in simultaneous heart-kidney transplantation under the 2018 heart allocation system.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate the clinical trends and the impact of the 2018 heart allocation policy change on both waitlist and post-transplant outcomes in simultaneous heart-kidney transplantation in the United States. METHODS: The United Network for Organ Sharing registry was queried to compare adult patients before and after the allocation policy change. This study included 2 separate analyses evaluating the waitlist and post-transplant outcomes. Multivariable analyses were performed to determine the 2018 allocation system's risk-adjusted hazards for 1-year waitlist and post-transplant mortality. RESULTS: The initial analysis investigating the waitlist outcomes included 1779 patients listed for simultaneous heart-kidney transplantation. Of these, 1075 patients (60.4%) were listed after the 2018 allocation policy change. After the policy change, the waitlist outcomes significantly improved with a shorter waitlist time, lower likelihood of de-listing, and higher likelihood of transplantation. In the subsequent analysis investigating the post-transplant outcomes, 1130 simultaneous heart-kidney transplant recipients were included, where 738 patients (65.3%) underwent simultaneous heart-kidney transplantation after the policy change. The 90-day, 6-month, and 1-year post-transplant survival and complication rates were comparable before and after the policy change. Multivariable analyses demonstrated that the 2018 allocation system positively impacted risk-adjusted 1-year waitlist mortality (sub-hazard ratio, 0.66, 95% CI, 0.51-0.85, P < .001), but it did not significantly impact risk-adjusted 1-year post-transplant mortality (hazard ratio, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.72-1.47, P = .876). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates increased rates of simultaneous heart-kidney transplantation with a shorter waitlist time after the 2018 allocation policy change. Furthermore, there were improved waitlist outcomes and comparable early post-transplant survival after simultaneous heart-kidney transplantation under the 2018 allocation system.

Donation after circulatory death improves probability of heart transplantation in waitlisted candidates and results in post-transplant outcomes similar to those achieved with brain-dead donors.

OBJECTIVE: To quantitate the impact of heart donation after circulatory death (DCD) donor utilization on both waitlist and post-transplant outcomes in the United States. METHODS: The United Network for Organ Sharing database was queried to identify all adult waitlisted and transplanted candidates between October 18, 2018, and December 31, 2022. Waitlisted candidates were stratified according to whether they had been approved for donation after brain death (DBD) offers only or also approved for DCD offers. The cumulative incidence of transplantation was compared between the 2 cohorts. In a post-transplant analysis, 1-year post-transplant survival was compared between unmatched and propensity-score-matched cohorts of DBD and DCD recipients. RESULTS: A total of 14,803 candidates were waitlisted, including 12,287 approved for DBD donors only and 2516 approved for DCD donors. Overall, DCD approval was associated with an increased sub-hazard ratio (HR) for transplantation and a lower sub-HR for delisting owing to death/deterioration after risk adjustment. In a subgroup analysis, candidates with blood type B and status 4 designation received the greatest benefit from DCD approval. A total of 12,238 recipients underwent transplantation, 11,636 with DBD hearts and 602 with DCD hearts. Median waitlist times were significantly shorter for status 3 and status 4 recipients receiving DCD hearts. One-year post-transplant survival was comparable between unmatched and propensity score-matched cohorts of DBD and DCD recipients. CONCLUSIONS: The use of DCD hearts confers a higher probability of transplantation and a lower incidence of death/deterioration while on the waitlist, particularly among certain subpopulations such as status 4 candidates. Importantly, the use of DCD donors results in similar post-transplant survival as DBD donors.

The Preimplantation Psychosocial Evaluation and Prediction of Clinical Outcomes During Mechanical Circulatory Support: What Information Is Most Prognostic?

BACKGROUND: Psychosocial evaluations are required for long-term mechanical circulatory support (MCS) candidates, no matter whether MCS will be destination therapy (DT) or a bridge to heart transplantation. Although guidelines specify psychosocial contraindications to MCS, there is no comprehensive examination of which psychosocial evaluation domains are most prognostic for clinical outcomes. We evaluated whether overall psychosocial risk, determined across all psychosocial domains, predicted outcomes, and which specific domains appeared responsible for any effects. METHODS: A single-site retrospective analysis was performed for adults receiving MCS between April 2004 and December 2017. Using an established rating system, we coded psychosocial evaluations to identify patients at low, moderate, or high overall risk. We similarly determined risk within each of 10 individual psychosocial domains. Multivariable analyses evaluated whether psychosocial risk predicted clinical decisions about MCS use (DT versus bridge), and postimplantation mortality, transplantation, rehospitalization, MCS pump exchange, and standardly defined adverse medical events (AEs). RESULTS: In 241 MCS recipients, greater overall psychosocial risk increased the likelihood of a DT decision (odds ratio, 1.76; P = 0.017); and postimplantation pump exchange and occurrence of AEs (hazard ratios [HRs] ≥ 1.25; P ≤ 0.042). The individual AEs most strongly predicted were cardiac arrhythmias and device malfunctions (HRs ≥ 1.39; P ≤ 0.032). The specific psychosocial domains predicting at least 1 study outcome were mental health problem severity, poorer medical adherence, and substance use (odds ratios and HRs ≥ 1.32; P ≤ 0.010). CONCLUSIONS: The psychosocial evaluation predicts not only clinical decisions about MCS use (DT versus bridge) but important postimplantation outcomes. Strategies to address psychosocial risk factors before or soon after implantation may help to reduce postimplantation clinical risks.