Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:Since February 2020, exception points have been allocated equivalent to the median model for end-stage liver disease at transplant within 250 nautical miles of the transplant center (MMaT/250). We compared transplant rate and waitlist mortality for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) exception, non-HCC exception, and non-exception candidates to determine whether MMaT/250 advantages (or disadvantages) exception candidates. METHODS:Using Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients data, we identified 23 686 adult, first-time, active, deceased donor liver transplant (DDLT) candidates between February 4, 2020, and February 3, 2022. We compared DDLT rates using Cox regression, and waitlist mortality/dropout using competing risks regression in non-exception versus HCC versus non-HCC candidates. RESULTS:Within 24 mo of study entry, 58.4% of non-exception candidates received DDLT, compared with 57.8% for HCC candidates and 70.5% for non-HCC candidates. After adjustment, HCC candidates had 27% lower DDLT rate (adjusted hazard ratio = 0.680.730.77) compared with non-exception candidates. However, waitlist mortality for HCC was comparable to non-exception candidates (adjusted subhazard ratio [asHR] = 0.931.031.15). Non-HCC candidates with pulmonary complications of cirrhosis or cholangiocarcinoma had substantially higher risk of waitlist mortality compared with non-exception candidates (asHR = 1.271.702.29 for pulmonary complications of cirrhosis, 1.352.043.07 for cholangiocarcinoma). The same was not true of non-HCC candidates with exceptions for other reasons (asHR = 0.540.881.44). CONCLUSIONS:Under MMaT/250, HCC, and non-exception candidates have comparable risks of dying before receiving liver transplant, despite lower transplant rates for HCC. However, non-HCC candidates with pulmonary complications of cirrhosis or cholangiocarcinoma have substantially higher risk of dying before receiving liver transplant; these candidates may merit increased allocation priority.

BACKGROUND:Frailty is associated with poor outcomes in surgical patients including kidney transplant recipients. Transplant centers that measure frailty have better pre- and post-operative outcomes. However, clinical utility of existing tools is low due to time constraints. To address this major barrier to implementation in the pre-operative evaluation of patients, we developed an abridged frailty phenotype. METHODS:The abridged frailty phenotype was developed by simplifying the 5 Physical Frailty Phenotype (PFP) components in a two-center prospective cohort of 3,220 kidney transplant candidates and tested for efficiency (time to completion) in 20 candidates evaluation (1/2009-3/2020). We examined area under curve (AUC) and Cohen's kappa agreement to compare the abridged assessment with the PFP. We compared waitlist mortality risk (competing risks models) by frailty using the PFP and abridged assessment, respectively. Model discrimination was assessed using Harrell's C-statistic. RESULTS:Of 3,220 candidates, the PFP and abridged assessment identified 23.8% and 27.4% candidates as frail, respectively. The abridged frailty phenotype had substantial agreement (kappa=0.69, 95%CI:0.66-0.71) and excellent discrimination (area under the curve=0.861). Among 20 patients at evaluation, abridged assessment took 5-7 minutes to complete. The PFP and abridged assessment had similar associations with waitlist mortality (subdistribution hazard ratio [SHR]=1.62, 95%CI:1.26-2.08 vs. SHR=1.70, 95%CI:1.33-2.16) and comparable mortality discrimination (p=0.51). CONCLUSIONS:The abridged assessment is an efficient and valid way to identify frailty. It predicts waitlist mortality without sacrificing discrimination. Surgical departments should consider utilizing the abridged assessment to evaluate frailty in patients when time is limited.

Kidney transplantation from blood type A2/A2B donors to type B recipients (A2→B) has increased dramatically under the current Kidney Allocation System (KAS). Among living donor transplant recipients, A2-incompatible transplants are associated with an increased risk of all-cause and death-censored graft failure. In light of this, we used SRTR data from 12/2014-6/2022 to evaluate the association between A2→B listing and time to deceased donor kidney transplantation (DDKT) and post-DDKT outcomes for A2→B recipients. Among 53,409 type B waitlist registrants, only 12.6% were listed as eligible to accept A2→B offers ("A2-eligible"). 1-/3-/5-year DDKT rates were 32.1%/61.4%/72.1% among A2-eligible candidates and 14.1%/29.9%/44.1% among A2-ineligible candidates, with the former experiencing a 133% higher rate of DDKT (Cox weighted HR = _2.192.33_2.47; p<0.001). The 7-year adjusted mortality was comparable between A2→B and B-ABOc (type B/O donors to B recipients) recipients (wHR _0.780.94_1.13, p=0.5). Moreover, there was no difference between A2→B vs. B-ABOc DDKT recipients with regards to death-censored graft failure (wHR _0.771.00_1.29, p>0.9) or all-cause graft loss (wHR _0.820.96_1.12, p=0.6). Following its broader adoption since the implementation of KAS, A2→B DDKT appears to be a safe and effective transplant modality for eligible candidates. As such, A2→B listing for eligible type B candidates should be expanded.

BACKGROUND:Understanding immunogenicity and alloimmune risk following severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccination in kidney transplant recipients is imperative to understanding the correlates of protection and to inform clinical guidelines. METHODS:We studied 50 kidney transplant recipients following SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and quantified their anti-spike protein antibody, donor-derived cell-free DNA (dd-cfDNA), gene expression profiling (GEP), and alloantibody formation. RESULTS:Participants were stratified using nucleocapsid testing as either SARS-CoV-2-naïve or experienced prior to vaccination. One of 34 (3%) SARS-CoV-2 naïve participants developed anti-spike protein antibodies. In contrast, the odds ratio for the association of a prior history of SARS-CoV-2 infection with vaccine response was 18.3 (95% confidence interval 3.2, 105.0, p < 0.01). Pre- and post-vaccination levels did not change for median dd-cfDNA (0.23% vs. 0.21% respectively, p = 0.13), GEP scores (9.85 vs. 10.4 respectively, p = 0.45), calculated panel reactive antibody, de-novo donor specific antibody status, or estimated glomerular filtration rate. CONCLUSIONS:SARS-CoV-2 vaccines do not appear to trigger alloimmunity in kidney transplant recipients. The degree of vaccine immunogenicity was associated most strongly with a prior history of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW:The deceased donor organ pool has broadened beyond young, otherwise healthy head trauma victims. But an abundance of donated organs only benefits patients if they are accepted, expeditiously transported and actually transplanted. This review focuses on postdonation challenges and opportunities to increase the number of transplants through improved organ utilization. RECENT FINDINGS:We build upon recently proposed changes in terminology for measuring organ utilization. Among organs recovered for transplant, the nonuse rate (NUR REC ) has risen above 25% for kidneys and pancreata. Among donors, the nonuse rate (NUR DON ) has risen to 40% for livers and exceeds 70% for thoracic organs. Programme-level variation in offer acceptance rates vastly exceeds variation in the traditional, 1-year survival benchmark. Key opportunities to boost utilization include donation after circulatory death and hepatitis C virus (HCV)+ organs; acute kidney injury and suboptimal biopsy kidneys; older and steatotic livers. SUMMARY:Underutilization of less-than-ideal, yet transplant-worthy organs remains an obstacle to maximizing the impact of the U.S. transplant system. The increased risk of inferior posttransplant outcomes must always be weighed against the risks of remaining on the waitlist. Advanced perfusion technologies; tuning allocation systems for placement efficiency; and data-driven clinical decision support have the potential to increase utilization of medically complex organs.

Mycotic pseudoaneurysms are a rare, life-threatening complication after pancreas transplant. There have been limited reports of endovascular treatment of mycotic pseudoaneurysms in pancreas transplant recipients. Herein, we report on a case of a mycotic pseudoaneurysm from Pseudomonas aeruginosa after pancreas transplant. A 53-year-old male recipient underwent an uneventful simultaneous pancreas and kidney transplant. He was readmitted 48 days posttransplant with fevers and rigors. Pan-cultures were performed and broad-spectrum antibiotics were initiated. Imaging studies demonstrated a large mycotic pseudoaneurysm arising from the right common iliac artery adjacent to the arterial Y-graft anastomosis of the transplant pancreas. Endovascular stent placement was used to exclude the pseudoaneurysm prior to transplant pancreatectomy. During pancreatectomy, the lateral wall of the common iliac artery was found to be necrotic with significant exposure of the endovascular stent. After ligation and excision of the common iliac artery, a femorofemoral bypass was performed to revascularize the lower extremity. This case report highlights the advantage of a staged endovascular and surgical management strategy for complex mycotic pseudoaneurysms after pancreas transplant.

BACKGROUND:Gabapentinoids, commonly used for treating neuropathic pain, may be misused and coprescribed with opioid and benzodiazepine, increasing the risk of mortality and dependency among kidney transplant recipients. METHODS:We identified adult kidney transplant recipients who enrolled in Medicare Part D in 2006-2017 using the United States Renal Data System/Medicare claims database. We characterized recipients' post-transplant concomitant prescription of gabapentinoids, opioids, and benzodiazepine stratified by transplant year and recipient factors (age, sex, race, and diabetes). We investigated whether concomitant prescriptions were associated with postkidney transplant mortality using Cox regression. Models incorporated inverse probability weighting to adjust for confounders. RESULTS:Among 63,359 eligible recipients, 13% of recipients filled at least one gabapentinoid prescription within 1 year after kidney transplant. The prevalence of gabapentinoid prescriptions increased by 70% over the study period (16% in 2017 versus 10% in 2006). Compared with nonusers, gabapentinoids users were more likely to have diabetes (55% versus 37%) and obesity (46% versus 34%). Of the 8509 recipients with gabapentinoid prescriptions, 45% were coprescribed opioids, 7% were coprescribed benzodiazepines, and 3% were coprescribed both opioids and benzodiazepines. Compared with no study prescriptions, gabapentinoid monotherapy (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]=1.25; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.16 to 1.32) and combination therapy (gabapentinoids and opioids [aHR=1.49; 95% CI, 1.39 to 1.60], gabapentinoids and benzodiazepines [aHR=1.46; 95% CI, 1.03 to 2.08], and coprescribing all three [aHR=1.88; 95% CI, 1.18 to 2.98]) were all associated with a higher risk of postkidney transplant mortality. CONCLUSIONS:Gabapentinoid coprescription with both benzodiazepines and opioids among kidney transplant recipients increased over time. Kidney transplant recipients prescribed gabapentinoids had a higher risk of post-transplant mortality, and the risk was higher with opioids or benzodiazepine coprescription.

OBJECTIVE:Transplant renal artery stenosis (TRAS) after renal transplantation is a common cause of graft dysfunction and failure. Endovascular intervention in the form of percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) and stenting has rapidly become the dominant treatment modality for the TRAS. There is a paucity of clinical data on use of drug-eluting stent (DES) for TRAS. We investigated the outcomes of patients with clinically significant TRAS undergoing DES placement. METHODS:A retrospective review of patients with clinically significant TRAS undergoing PTA with DES placement from June 2014 to April 2021 was conducted. Patients treated for TRAS exhibited uncontrolled hypertension and/or unexplained allograft dysfunction. Patient demographics, procedural details, and follow-up outcomes were collected. Primary endpoints were the in-stent primary patency and graft survival. Secondary endpoints were freedom from reintervention, primary-assisted patency and access-related complications. RESULTS:Thirteen TRAS in twelve patients with graft function alteration were treated with DES. The median age was 57 years (interquartile range (IQR), 48-63 years), and nine (70%) patients were male (Table). The median follow-up was 9 months (IQR, 4-52 months). The most common comorbidity was hypertension (100%), coronary artery disease (83%) and diabetes. The median time from deceased donor transplant to intervention was 5.8 months (IQR, 3.5-6.7 months). TRAS was most commonly found at the juxta-ostial segment (77%). The procedure was performed with carbon dioxide angiography with minimal amount of iodinated contrast (median, 3 mL) under local anesthesia in nine (69%) and general anesthesia in four (31%) patients. The median stent diameter was 4.5 mm (IQR, 4-5 mm), and the median stent length was 15 mm (IQR, 15-18 mm). No intraoperative complications occurred. The rates of stenosis-free primary patency of the DES and graft survival were 76% and 100%, respectively. All three reinterventions for restenosis resulted from the kinking of the transplant renal artery proximal to the DES, which were treated by extending the stent more proximally 1-2 mm into the external iliac artery. There were no access-related complications. The median time to reintervention was 0.9 months (range, 0.23-2 months). Freedom from reintervention and primary-assisted patency were 76% and 100%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS:Our study demonstrates that DES is a safe and effective treatment modality in patients with TRAS at short to mid-term follow-up. As all reinterventions after DES were performed due to kinking of the transplant renal artery proximal to the stent, bridging of the DES 1-2 mm into the external iliac artery is recommended.

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:We designed this study to test whether clazakizumab, a direct interleukin-6 inhibitor, benefits patients hospitalized with severe or critical COVID-19 disease accompanied by hyperinflammation. DESIGN/METHODS:Multicenter, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, seamless phase II/III trial. SETTING/METHODS:Five U.S. medical centers. PATIENTS/METHODS:Adults inpatients with severe COVID-19 disease and hyperinflammation. INTERVENTIONS/METHODS:Eighty-one patients enrolled in phase II, randomized 1:1:1 to low-dose (12.5 mg) or high-dose (25 mg) clazakizumab or placebo. Ninety-seven patients enrolled in phase III, randomized 1:1 to high-dose clazakizumab or placebo. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS/RESULTS:The primary outcome was 28-day ventilator-free survival. Secondary outcomes included overall survival ,frequency and duration of intubation, and frequency and duration of ICU admission. Per Data Safety and Monitoring Board recommendations, additional secondary outcomes describing clinical status and status changes, as measured by an ordinal scale, were added. Bayesian cumulative proportional odds, logistic, and Poisson regression models were used. The low-dose arm was dropped when the phase II study suggested superiority of the high-dose arm. We report on 152 patients, 74 randomized to placebo and 78 to high-dose clazakizumab. Patients receiving clazakizumab had greater odds of 28-day ventilator-free survival (odds ratio [OR] = 3.84; p [OR > 1] 99.9%), as well as overall survival at 28 and 60 days (OR = 1.75; p [OR > 1] 86.5% and OR = 2.53; p [OR > 1] 97.7%). Clazakizumab was associated with lower odds of intubation (OR = 0.2; p [OR] < 1; 99.9%) and ICU admission (OR = 0.26; p [OR < 1] 99.6%); shorter durations of ventilation and ICU stay (risk ratio [RR] < 0.75; p [RR < 1] > 99% for both); and greater odds of improved clinical status at 14, 28, and 60 days (OR = 2.32, p [OR > 1] 98.1%; OR = 3.36, p [OR > 1] 99.6%; and OR = 3.52, p [OR > 1] 99.8%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS:Clazakizumab significantly improved 28-day ventilator-free survival, 28- and 60-day overall survival, as well as clinical outcomes in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and hyperinflammation.

Little is known about the effects of hepatitis C viremia on immunologic outcomes in the era of direct-acting antivirals. We conducted a prospective, single-arm trial of lung transplantation from hepatitis C-infected donors into hepatitis C-naïve recipients (n = 21). Recipients were initiated on glecaprevir-pibrentasvir immediately post-transplant and were continued on therapy for a total of 8 weeks. A control group of recipients of hepatitis C-negative lungs were matched 1:1 on baseline variables (n = 21). The primary outcome was the frequency of acute cellular rejection over 1-year post-transplant. Treatment with glecaprevir-pibrentasvir was well tolerated and resulted in viremia clearance after a median of 16 days of therapy (IQR 10-24 days). At one year, there was no difference in incidence of acute cellular rejection (71.4% vs. 85.7%, P = .17) or rejection requiring treatment (33.3% vs. 57.1%, P = .12). Mean cumulative acute rejection scores were similar between groups (.46 [SD ± .53] vs. .52 [SD ± .37], P = .67). Receipt of HCV+ organs was not associated with acute rejection on unadjusted Cox regression analysis (HR .55, 95% CI .28-1.11, P = .09), or when adjusted for risk factors known to be associated with acute rejection (HR .57, 95% CI .27-1.21, P = .14). Utilization of hepatitis C infected lungs with immediate treatment leads to equivalent immunologic outcomes at 1 year.