Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:The clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with glycogen storage disease (GSD) who undergo liver transplantation (LT) have not been well defined. In this study, our objective was to determine the outcome of LT in patients with GSD and compare it with a comparable group of patients without GSD (matched controls). METHODS:UNOS data from 1986 to 2007 were used for this study. For each GSD patient (n = 95; men 62%) who was transplanted, three patients (n = 285, men 60%) without GSD (case controls) matched for age ± five yr, year of transplantation and donor risk index (DRI) ± 0.2 were identified from the UNOS database in a random manner. Unadjusted patient survival was determined by Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and significance determined by log-rank test. RESULTS:The mean age of the group was 17.9 yr. GSD patients had lower BMI (22 vs. 24, p = 0.002), lower serum bilirubin (2.7 vs. 13.5 mg/dL, p < 0.0001), higher serum albumin (3.7 vs. 3.1 g/dL, p < 0.0001), and higher wait-list time (239 vs. 74 d, p < 0.0001) compared to case controls. Recipient age and DRI were similar between the groups. Tumors were more common in GSD group (13.7% vs. 5%). Patient survival was significantly better (p = 0.024) in GSD group at one, five, and 10 yr (82%, 76%, and 64%) than non-GSD (73%, 65%, and 59%) group. CONCLUSIONS:In this matched-control study, patients who underwent LT for GSD had a better long-term survival than a comparable group of patients without GSD.

Expanding the pool of available deceased donor kidneys is critical for improving the outcomes of prospective and current renal transplant candidates. A number of interventions have been proposed that may increase the pool of donors in the US. However, these interventions have variable levels of empirical evidence supporting their potential beneficial impact. Proposed interventions include the instigation of policies for presumed donor consent, the expansion of donor registration, increased quality oversight of transplant providers, financial incentives for donors, increased reimbursement for higher risk donors, alterations in organ allocation policies and distribution, and the selective use of donors with potential or known risk for disease transmission. Many of these interventions have contentious elements that may have delayed or impeded their implementation; however, these options should be considered in the context of the diminishing prognoses for prospective transplant patients, given the increasing scarcity of donor organs relative to the population need. In this Review, we outline the proposed interventions and briefly discuss salient issues that characterize the debates concerning their implementation and effectiveness. Ultimately, any intervention must be based on the best evidence available, with consideration of numerous stakeholders and in conjunction with a careful evaluation of long-term and potential unintended consequences.

In an effort to increase living donor transplantation while minimizing risk and morbidity, recent advances have been made in surgical technique, kidney paired donation, desensitization, identification of living donors and research into living donor outcomes. Single-port nephrectomy and vaginal extraction have reduced donor nephrectomy incision size. Transport of live donor kidneys has reduced geographic barriers to kidney paired donation, and participation of compatible pairs and nondirected donors has increased match opportunities for incompatible pairs participating in this modality. ABO-incompatible transplantation can now be successfully performed without high-intensity immunomodulation, and HLA-incompatible transplantation has been shown in a large single-center study to provide profound survival benefit compared with waiting for a compatible donor. Complement inhibition is an exciting, emerging approach that may facilitate incompatible transplantation and treat antibody-mediated rejection. Educational and communications interventions are proving valuable in helping patients find living donors, and large studies continue to provide reassurance to carefully screened living donors that risks are very low. As living donors are critical to addressing the profound organ shortage, efforts to increase living donation remain important.

BACKGROUND:Only 29% of deceased donor kidney recipients with hepatitis C virus (HCV) receive HCV-positive (HCV+) kidneys. These kidneys are discarded 2.5 times more often than their HCV-negative (HCV-) counterparts, possibly due to the sense that an HCV+ kidney may adversely affect recipient liver function. The goals of this study were to characterize liver disease in HCV+ kidney recipients and compare rates of liver-related outcomes by kidney donor HCV status. STUDY DESIGN/METHODS:Observational cohort study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS/METHODS:6,250 patients with HCV who had a kidney transplant in 1995-2008 as captured in the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) database. Liver-related outcomes were assessed by cross-linking with the liver waitlist and transplant data sets. PREDICTOR/METHODS:HCV status of transplanted kidney. OUTCOMES/RESULTS:Joining the liver waitlist, receiving a liver transplant, death. MEASUREMENTS/METHODS:Time to event. RESULTS:Only 63 (1%) of HCV+ kidney recipients eventually joined the liver waitlist during the 13-year study period. Those who received HCV+ kidneys had a 2.6-fold higher hazard of joining the liver list (P < 0.001); however, the absolute difference in rate of listing between recipients of HCV- and HCV+ kidneys was <2%. This is consistent with findings of only 2% lower patient survival at 3 years in HCV+ patients receiving HCV+ versus HCV- kidneys. LIMITATIONS/CONCLUSIONS:We lacked data for HCV viral load and genotype of both HCV+ recipients and transplanted HCV+ kidneys. CONCLUSIONS:Because transplant with an HCV+ kidney may reduce waiting-time by more than a year for an HCV+ patient and there is a high risk of kidney waitlist mortality, a 2% increased rate of adverse liver outcomes and 2% increased rate of death at 3 years should not universally preclude the use of HCV+ kidneys when the intended recipient is also HCV+.