Implications of drug intoxication on donor utilization and outcomes in liver transplantation.

INTRODUCTION: This study evaluates the implications of drug intoxication (DI) on donor utilization and outcomes in liver transplantation (LT). METHODS: The UNOS STAR database was evaluated for all potential donors and adult, first-time, whole LT between 2005 and 2019. Logistic regression analyses evaluated liver utilization; proportional hazards modeling assessed risk of 1-year graft loss. RESULTS: A total of 132 783 potential donors (10 205, 7.7% from DI), and 90 612 adult LT were identified (7490, 8.3% from DI). DI donors had median age 32 years (IQR 26-40 years, p < .001), were 42.6% female (n = 4346), and 15.5% were DCD donors (n = 1583). Utilization of DI donors changed over time, such that by 2015-2019 they were the most likely donor cause of death (COD) to be utilized. Among LT recipients, there were insignificant differences (<2% variance) in age, gender, ethnicity, and etiology of liver disease according to donor COD. Recipients with MELD scores >30 more frequently received grafts from donors with trauma (23.8%) and DI (21.8%) versus cardiovascular (20.0%) and CVA/stroke (19.9%, p < .001). Among DBD donors, DI-COD was associated with superior 1-year graft survival compared to donors from trauma (HR 1.172, 95% CI 1.057-1.300) and CVA/stroke (HR 1.404, 95% CI 1.264-1.561, p < .001). Donor COD was not significantly associated with 1-year graft loss among DCD donors. CONCLUSIONS: There is an increased likelihood of donor utilization when COD is drug overdose and an increased likelihood of 1-year graft survival compared to donors from trauma, CVA/stroke, and other COD.

Organ Utilization Rates from Non-Ideal Donors for Solid Organ Transplant in the United States.

Background: Non-ideal donors provide acceptable allografts and may expand the donor pool. This study evaluates donor utilization across solid organs over 15-years in the United States. Methods: We analyzed the OPTN STAR database to identify potential donors across three donor eras: 2005-2009, 2010-2014, and 2015-2019. Donors were analyzed by a composite Donor Utilization Score (DUS), comprised of donor age and comorbidities. Outcomes of interest were overall and organ-specific donor utilization. Descriptive analyses and multivariable logistic regression modeling were performed. p-values < 0.01 considered significant. Results: Of 132,465 donors, 32,710 (24.7%) were identified as non-ideal donors (NID), based on a DUS ≥ 3. Compared to ideal donors (ID), NID were older (median 56 years, IQR 51-64 years vs. 35 years, 22-48 years, p < 0.001) and more frequently female (44.3% vs. 39.1%, p < 0.001), Black (22.1% vs. 14.6%, p < 0.001) and obese (60.7% vs. 19.6%, p < 0.001). The likelihood of overall DBD utilization from NID increased from Era 1 to Era 2 (OR 1.227, 95% CI 1.123-1.341, p < 0.001) and Era 3 (OR 1.504, 1.376-1.643, p < 0.001), while DCD donor utilization in NID was not statistically different across Eras. Compared to Era 1, the likelihood of DBD utilization from NID for kidney transplantation was lower in Era 2 (OR 0.882, 0.822-0.946) and Era 3 (OR 0.938, 0.876-1.004, p = 0.002). The likelihood of NID utilization increased in Era 3 compared to Era 1 for livers (OR 1.511, 1.411-1.618, p < 0.001), hearts (OR 1.623, 1.415-1.862, p < 0.001), and lungs (OR 2.251, 2.011-2.520, p < 0.001). Conclusions: Using a universal definition of NID across organs, NID donor utilization is increasing; however, use of DUS may improve resource utilization in identifying donors at highest likelihood for multi-organ donation.

Incidence and Outcomes of Simultaneous Thoracoabdominal Triple Organ Transplantation in the United States.

BACKGROUND: This study aims to evaluate patient outcomes of simultaneous triple organ transplants, which may provide insight into optimal donor allocation while maximizing recipient benefit. METHODS: Triple organ transplants and their corollary dual organ transplants were identified using the United Network for Organ Sharing database. Triple organ transplants evaluated included heart-lung-kidney (n = 12) and heart-liver-kidney (n = 37). Heart-lung-kidney recipients were compared with heart-lung (n = 325), lung-kidney (n = 91), and heart-kidney (n = 2022) groups. Heart-liver-kidney recipients were compared with heart-liver (n = 451), liver-kidney (n = 10422), and heart-kidney (n = 2517) recipients. Patient survival outcomes were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using log-rank tests. RESULTS: Patients undergoing triple organ transplants showed similar 10-year survival as their corresponding dual organ transplant cohorts. Patient survival estimate at 10 years for the heart-lung-kidney group was 45%, with no statistically significant difference in survival when compared with dual organ groups (P = .16). Survival estimates at 10 years for the heart-liver-kidney group was 49%, with no statistically significant difference in survival when compared with dual organ groups (P = .06). CONCLUSION: Despite the surgical burden of adding a third organ transplant, heart-liver-kidney and heart-lung-kidney have similar survival outcomes to dual organ equivalents and represent a reasonable allocation option in well-selected patients.