Simultaneous heart-kidney transplant in patients with borderline estimated glomerular filtration rate without dialysis dependency.

BACKGROUND: Appropriate patient selection for simultaneous heart-kidney transplantation (sHK) in patients with moderate renal dysfunction remains challenging. METHODS: From the United Network for Organ Sharing database (2003-2020), we identified 5678 adults with an estimated pre-transplant glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) between 30 and 45 mL/min/1.73 m2 and no pre-transplant dialysis. Patients undergoing sHK (n = 293) were compared with those undergoing heart transplantation alone (n = 5385) using 1:3 propensity score matching. RESULTS: The sHK utilization rate increased from 1.8% in 2003 to 12.2% in 2020 (p < .001). After matching, 1 and 5-year survival was 87.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] 83.3-91.0) and 80.0% (95% CI 74.2-84.6) after sHK, and 87.3% (95% CI 85.2-89.1) and 71.8% (95% CI 68.4-74.9) after heart transplant alone (p = .04). In the subgroup analysis, sHK was associated with a 5-year survival benefit only in patients with 30 < eGFR ≤ 35 mL/min/1.73 m2 (p = .05) but not in those with 35 < eGFR < 45 mL/min/1.73 m2 (p = .45). Patients who underwent heart transplants alone also had a higher incidence of becoming chronic dialysis-dependent after transplant within 5-year follow-up (10.2%, 95% CI 8.0-12.6 vs. 3.8%, 95% CI 1.7-7.1, p = .004). The 5-year incidence of subsequent kidney waitlisting and transplants after heart transplants alone was 5.6% and 1.9%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Among propensity-matched patients without pre-transplant dialysis, compared to heart transplants alone, sHK had improved 5-year survival in those with 30 < eGFR ≤ 35 but not in those with 35 < eGFR < 45 mL/min/1.73 m2 . One-year survival was similar irrespective of eGFR. Receiving a kidney after a heart transplant alone is rare under the current allocation system.

Patient reflections, challenges, and supports related to early liver transplant for severe alcohol-associated liver disease.

Transplant centers conventionally require at least 6 months of alcohol abstinence before offering liver transplants for alcohol-associated liver disease. However, early liver transplant (ELT)-proceeding with a transplant when clinically necessary without first meeting the conventional requirement-is increasingly gaining attention. In our study, we qualitatively assessed ELT recipients' perceived challenges and supports regarding alcohol-associated liver disease, transplant, and posttransplant survivorship. To diversify perspectives based on gender, race/ethnicity, age, time since ELT, and pretransplant abstinence duration, we purposively recruited ELT recipients and conducted semistructured interviews. Recruitment continued until data saturation. We analyzed transcripts using inductive thematic analysis. We interviewed 20 ELT recipients between June and December 2020 and identified themes within 3 participant-characterized time periods. Three themes emerged in life before severe illness: (1) alcohol as a "constant" part of life, (2) alcohol use negatively affecting relationships and work life, and (3) feeling "stuck" in the cycle of drinking. Two themes emerged during the severe illness period: (4) rapidity of health decline and (5) navigating medical care and the 6-month abstinence requirement. Finally, in life after transplant, 4 themes emerged: (6) feelings of shame or stigma and new self-worth, (7) reconnecting with others and redefining boundaries, (8) transplant as a defining point for sobriety, and (9) work-related challenges. Overall, participants expressed gratitude for receiving a gift of life and acknowledged their responsibilities to the new liver. ELT recipient experiences reveal complex psychosocial challenges related to addiction, inadequate support system, and stigma, particularly in the posttransplant period. The care of ELT recipients would be incomplete if focused solely on optimizing patient or graft survival.

Perceived Susceptibility to Chronic Kidney Disease and Hypertension Self-Management among Black and White Live Kidney Donors.

Background: Despite the societal benefits of live kidney donation, Black donors may be more likely than White donors to develop hypertension (HTN) and chronic kidney disease after donation. Among live kidney donors diagnosed with post-donation HTN, little is known about potential racial/ethnic differences in HTN self-care behaviors and perceived susceptibility to developing kidney disease. Methods: We ascertained electronic medical records and phone survey data from live donors enrolled in the multi-center Wellness and Health Outcomes of LivE Donors (WHOLE-Donor) Hypertension Care Study between May 2013 and April 2020. Using multivariable logistic regression models performed January through June 2021, we examined potential associations of donor race/ethnicity with perceived susceptibility to kidney disease and self-care behaviors (ie, Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System measure assessing self-reported actions to control high blood pressure). Results: The study included 318 US-based live kidney donors who developed post-donation HTN (57.6% female; 78.9% White; 18.6% Black; and mean age 46.7 years at donation). Black donors were equally as likely as White donors to report being moderately or strongly concerned about developing kidney disease (adjusted odds ratio, aOR: 1.27, 95%CI: .66, 2.14, P=.57). Donors with diabetes were more likely than those without diabetes (aOR: 2.43, 95%CI: 1.03, 5.01, P=.04), while donors aged >50 years were less likely than younger donors (aOR: .39, 95%CI: .18, .85, P=.02) to report being moderately or strongly concerned about kidney disease. Overall, 87% of donors reported taking at least one action to help control blood pressure, with no significant differences by sociodemographic factors. Conclusions: We found no substantial differences in perceived susceptibility to kidney disease among Black and White donors, despite published evidence that Black donors may experience greater risk of developing kidney disease than White donors. Behavioral interventions to enhance knowledge about future disease risk, attitudes, and self-care strategies among living kidney donors may be beneficial.

Providing Quality of Care in Fragile and Vulnerable Settings: Lessons from South Sudan.

BACKGROUND: In 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) released a report concerning planning and actions to provide quality of care in fragile, conflict-affected, and vulnerable areas. South Sudan, the world's newest country, has encountered both natural and man-made disasters in recent years that have posed marked challenges to delivery of care. The Southern Sudan Healthcare Organization (SSHCO) operates as a non-governmental organization (NGO) in this setting, delivering and improving healthcare through war, flooding, and infectious outbreaks. OBJECTIVE: The goal of this paper is to highlight the challenges faced in providing care in South Sudan from an NGO perspective and apply the recent WHO guidelines on quality of care to optimize practical implementation. METHOD: Each of the WHO's eight elements for quality of care in South Sudan were examined in relation to the experience of SSHCO from 2013-2021. Analysis included: 1. summary of the WHO element; 2. examples of successful implementation; 3. barriers to implementation; and 4. recommendations to improve implementation. FINDINGS: The team found that communication and coordination were the most important aspects of improving quality of care in South Sudan. These should be prioritized and include intergovernmental partners, the local and national Ministry of Health (MOH), NGOs, and community stakeholders. Communication and coordination should foster community engagement, improved data collecting and reporting, and sharing of publicly accessible information. Better clinical staff training and governance are also required to ensure the most effective use of limited resources. CONCLUSION: South Sudan faces many barriers to quality of care with communication and coordination identified among the foremost issues. Practical application of the WHO elements of quality of care can assist NGOs in effectively identifying areas for improvement to deliver better quality essential health services.