Kidney Transplantation From Deceased Donors With Vaccine-induced Immune Thrombocytopenia and Thrombosis: An Updated Analysis of the UK Experience.

BACKGROUND: The emergence and attendant mortality of vaccine-induced immune thrombocytopenia and thrombosis (VITT) as a consequence of vaccination against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 have resulted in some patients with VITT being considered as deceased organ donors. Outcomes after kidney transplantation in this context are poorly described. Because the disease seems to be mediated by antiplatelet factor 4 antibodies, there is a theoretical risk of transmission via passenger leukocytes within the allograft. METHODS: We analyzed the experience of kidney transplantation from donors with VITT in the United Kingdom between January and June 2021. We followed-up all recipients of kidney-only transplants from donors with VITT to detect major postoperative complications or features of disease transmission and assess graft survival and function. RESULTS: There were 16 kidney donors and 30 single kidney transplant recipients in our study period. Of 11 preimplantation biopsies, 4 showed widespread glomerular microthrombi. After a median of 5 mo, patient and graft survival were 97% and 90%, respectively. The median 3-mo estimated glomerular filtration rate was 51 mL/min/1.73 m 2 . Two recipients had detectable antiplatelet factor 4 antibodies but no evidence of clinical disease after transplantation. Major hemorrhagic complications occurred in 3 recipients, all of whom had independent risk factors for bleeding, resulting in the loss of 2 grafts. The involvement of VITT could not be completely excluded in one of these cases. CONCLUSIONS: The UK experience to date shows that favorable outcomes are possible after kidney transplantation from donors with VITT but highlights the need for ongoing vigilance for donor-related complications in these patients.

Comparing Deceased Organ Donation Performance in Two Countries that Use Different Metrics: Comparing Apples With Apples.

Organ donation networks audit and report on national or regional organ donation performance, however there are inconsistencies in the metrics and definitions used, rendering comparisons difficult or inappropriate. This is despite multiple attempts exploring the possibility for convergently evolving audits so that collectives of donation networks might transparently share data and practice and then target system interventions. This paper represents a collaboration between the United Kingdom and Australian organ donation organisations which aimed to understand the intricacies of our respective auditing systems, compare the metrics and definitions they employ and ultimately assess their level of comparability. This point of view outlines the historical context underlying the development of the auditing tools, demonstrates their differences to the Critical Pathway proposed as a common tool a decade ago and presents a side-by-side comparison of donation definitions, metrics and data for the 2019 calendar year. There were significant differences in donation definition terminology, metrics and overall structure of the audits. Fitting the audits to a tiered scaffold allowed for reasonable comparisons however this required substantial effort and understanding of nuance. Direct comparison of international and inter-regional donation performance is challenging and would benefit from consistent auditing processes across organisations.

Designing a co-productive study to overcome known methodological challenges in organ donation research with bereaved family members.

BACKGROUND: Co-production of research into public health services has yet to demonstrate tangible benefits. Few studies have reported the impact of co-production on research outcomes. The previous studies of organ donation have identified challenges in engaging with public organizations responsible, gaining ethical approval for sensitive studies with the recently bereaved and difficulty in recruiting bereaved family members who were approached about organ donation. OBJECTIVE: To address these challenges, we designed the first large co-productive observational study to evaluate implementation of a new system of organ donation in Wales. This paper outlines the co-productive strategies that were designed to overcome known methodological challenges and reports what impact they had on resolving these challenges. DESIGN: Two-year co-produced study with multiple stakeholders with the specific intention of maximizing engagement with the National Health Service arm in Wales responsible for organ donation, and recruitment of bereaved family members whose perspectives are essential but commonly absent from studies. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: NHS Blood and Transplant, Welsh Government and multiple patient and public representatives who served as co-productive partners with the research team. RESULTS: Co-productive strategies enabled a smooth passage through four different ethics processes within the 10-week time frame, family member recruitment targets to be surpassed, sharing of routinely collected data on 100% of potential organ donor cases and development of further research capacity and capability in a critically under researched area. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Although expensive and time consuming, co-production was effective and added value to research processes and study outcomes.

Short-term impact of introducing a soft opt-out organ donation system in Wales: before and after study.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the short-term impact of a soft opt-out organ donation system on consent rates and donor numbers. DESIGN: Before and after observational study using bespoke routinely collected data. SETTING: National Health Service Blood and Transplant. PARTICIPANTS: 205 potential organ donor cases in Wales. INTERVENTIONS: The Act and implementation strategy. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES: Consent rates at 18 months post implementation compared with 3 previous years, and organ donor numbers 21 months before and after implementation. Changes in organ donor register activity post implementation for 18 months. RESULTS: The consent rate for all modes of consent was 61.0% (125/205), showing a recovery from the dip to 45.8% in 2014/2015. 22.4% (46/205) were deemed consented donors: consent rate 60.8% (28/46). Compared with the 3 years before the switch there was a significant difference in Welsh consent rates (χ2 p value=0.009). Over the same time period, rest of the UK consent rates also significantly increased from 58.6% (5256/8969) to 63.1% (2913/4614) (χ2 p value<0.0001), therefore the Wales increase cannot be attributed to the Welsh legislation change. Deceased donors did not increase: 101 compared with 104. Organ donation registration increased from 34% to 38% with 6% registering to opt-out. CONCLUSION: This is the first rigorous initial evaluation with bespoke data collected on all cases. The longer-term impact on consent rates and donor numbers is unclear. Concerns about a potential backlash and mass opting out were not realised. The move to a soft opt-out system has not resulted in a step change in organ donation behaviour, but can be seen as the first step of a longer journey. Policymakers should not assume that soft opt-out systems by themselves simply need more time to have a meaningful effect. Ongoing interventions to further enhance implementation and the public's understanding of organ donation are needed to reach the 2020 target of 80% consent rates. Further longitudinal monitoring is required.

The influence of socioeconomic deprivation on outcomes in pancreas transplantation in England: Registry data analysis.

Socioeconomic deprivation is associated with poorer outcomes in chronic diseases. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of socioeconomic deprivation on outcomes following pancreas transplantation among patients transplanted in England. We included all 1270 pancreas recipients transplanted between 2004 and 2012. We used the English Index of Multiple Deprivation (EIMD) score to assess the influence of socioeconomic deprivation on patient and pancreas graft survival. Higher scores mean higher deprivation status. Median EIMD score was 18.8, 17.7, and 18.1 in patients who received simultaneous pancreas and kidney (SPK), pancreas after kidney (PAK), and pancreas transplant alone (PTA), respectively (P = .56). Pancreas graft (censored for death) survival was dependent on the donor age (P = .08), cold ischemic time (CIT; P = .0001), the type of pancreas graft (SPK vs. PAK or PTA, P = .0001), and EIMD score (P = .02). The 5-year pancreas graft survival of the most deprived patient quartile was 62% compared to 75% among the least deprived (P = .013), and it was especially evident in the SPK group. EIMD score also correlated with patient survival (P = .05). When looking at the impact of individual domains of deprivation, we determined that "Environment" (P = .037) and "Health and Disability" (P = .035) domains had significant impact on pancreas graft survival. Socioeconomic deprivation, as expressed by the EIMD is an independent factor for pancreas graft and patient survival.

Elective liver transplant list mortality: development of a United Kingdom end-stage liver disease score.

BACKGROUND: Prediction of short-term survival probability is important in the selection and allocation of patients for liver transplantation, and the Mayo End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score has been used in these contexts. The aim of this study was to develop and validate a model for estimation of short-term prognosis of patients selected for elective liver transplantation in the United Kingdom. METHODS: A modeling dataset was based on 1103 adult patients registered for a first elective liver transplant in the United Kingdom between April 1, 2003, and March 31, 2006, and a validation dataset based on 452 patients registered between April 1, 2006, and March 31, 2007. The final model (United Kingdom End-Stage Liver Disease) included international normalized ratio, serum creatinine, bilirubin, and sodium. RESULTS: The model, based on the modeling dataset, accurately predicted mortality on the transplant list in the validation dataset and proved to be a better predictor than MELD or MELD-Na. The United Kingdom End-Stage Liver Disease score was not associated with overall posttransplant survival but was associated with both the duration of intensive care unit stay and overall initial hospital stay. CONCLUSION: This model, developed specifically for patients awaiting liver transplantation, provides a useful tool for the selection of patients for liver transplantation and the allocation of donor livers.