Faculty Bibliography

In the United States, a small proportion of potential deceased organ donor referrals lead to donation and recovery. Understanding variation in the processes involved between organ procurement organizations (OPOs) may help increase deceased donation and reduce the organ shortage. We studied 103 923 referrals from 10 OPOs from 2018 to 2019, of which 14.4% led to approach for authorization, 8.2% led to authorization, 5.1% led to organ recovery, and 4.8% led to transplantation. First-person authorization (FPA) was associated with threefold higher odds of donation (OR = _2.83 3.02 _3.22 , p < .001). Female referrals had 11% lower odds of approach; when approached, Black and Hispanic referrals had 46% and 35% lower odds of authorization, respectively (all p < .001). There was substantial OPO-level variation in rates of approach, authorization, and organ recovery, which persisted after adjusting for age, sex, race, and FPA status. An OPO's relative rate of approach correlated strongly with its relative rate of donation among all referrals (ρ = 0.43). Correlation between an individual OPO's authorization rate among approached families, and overall rate of donation, was negative, suggesting that high authorization rates may be the result of selective approach practices. Therefore, approaching a higher proportion of families for authorization may lead to higher donation rates.

A recent study concluded that SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine responses were improved among transplant patients taking mTOR inhibitors (mTORi). This could have profound implications for vaccine strategies in transplant patients; however, limitations in the study design raise concerns about the conclusions. To address this issue more robustly, in a large cohort with appropriate adjustment for confounders, we conducted various regression- and machine learning-based analyses to compare antibody responses by immunosuppressive agents in a national cohort (n = 1037). MMF was associated with significantly lower odds of positive antibody response (aOR = _0.09 0.13_0.18 ). Consistent with the recent mTORi study, the odds tended to be higher with mTORi (aOR = _1.00 1.45_2.13 ); however, importantly, this seemingly protective tendency disappeared (aOR = _0.47 0.73_1.12 ) after adjusting for MMF. We repeated this comparison by combinations of immunosuppression agents. Compared to MMF + tacrolimus, MMF-free regimens were associated with higher odds of positive antibody response (aOR = _2.39 4.26_7.92 for mTORi+tacrolimus; _2.34 5.54_15.32 for mTORi-only; and _6.78 10.25_15.93 for tacrolimus-only), whereas MMF-including regimens were not, regardless of mTORi use (aOR = _0.81 1.54_2.98 for MMF + mTORi; and _0.81 1.51_2.87 for MMF-only). We repeated these analyses in an independent cohort (n = 512) and found similar results. Our study demonstrates that the recently reported findings were confounded by MMF, and that mTORi is not independently associated with improved vaccine responses.

Racial and ethnic disparities persist in access to the liver transplantation (LT) waiting list; however, there is limited knowledge about underlying system-level factors that may be responsible for these disparities. Given the complex nature of LT candidate evaluation, a human factors and systems engineering approach may provide insights. We recruited participants from the LT teams (coordinators, advanced practice providers, physicians, social workers, dieticians, pharmacists, leadership) at two major LT centers. From December 2020 to July 2021, we performed ethnographic observations (participant-patient appointments, committee meetings) and semistructured interviews (N = 54 interviews, 49 observation hours). Based on findings from this multicenter, multimethod qualitative study combined with the Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety 2.0 (a human factors and systems engineering model for health care), we created a conceptual framework describing how transplant work system characteristics and other external factors may improve equity in the LT evaluation process. Participant perceptions about listing disparities described external factors (e.g., structural racism, ambiguous national guidelines, national quality metrics) that permeate the LT evaluation process. Mechanisms identified included minimal transplant team diversity, implicit bias, and interpersonal racism. A lack of resources was a common theme, such as social workers, transportation assistance, non-English-language materials, and time (e.g., more time for education for patients with health literacy concerns). Because of the minimal data collection or center feedback about disparities, participants felt uncomfortable with and unadaptable to unwanted outcomes, which perpetuate disparities. We proposed transplant center-level solutions (i.e., including but not limited to training of staff on health equity) to modifiable barriers in the clinical work system that could help patient navigation, reduce disparities, and improve access to care. Our findings call for an urgent need for transplant centers, national societies, and policy makers to focus efforts on improving equity (tailored, patient-centered resources) using the science of human factors and systems engineering.

OBJECTIVE/UNASSIGNED:Heart transplants (HTs) from hepatitis C virus (HCV)-viremic donors to HCV-seronegative recipients (HCV D+/R-) have good 6-month outcomes, but practice uptake and long-term outcomes overall and among candidates on mechanical circulatory support (MCS) have yet to be established. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:Using the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients, we identified US adult HCV-seronegative HT recipients (R-) from 2015 to 2021. We classified donors as HCV-seronegative (D-) or HCV-viremic (D+). We used multivariable regression to compare post-HT extracorporeal membranous oxygenation, dialysis, pacemaker, acute rejection, and risk of post-HT mortality between HCV D+/R- and HCV D-/R-. Models were adjusted for donor, recipient, and transplant characteristics and center HT volume. We performed subgroup analyses of recipients bridged with MCS. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED: > .05). High center HT volume but not HCV D+/R- volume (<5 vs >5 in any year) was associated with lower mortality for HCV D+/R- HT. CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:HCV D+/R- and D-/R- HT have similar outcomes at 3 years' posttransplant. These results underscore the opportunity provided by HCV D+/R- HT, including among the growing population bridged with MCS, and the potential benefit of further expanding use of HCV+ allografts.

Kidney transplant (KT) recipients with delirium, a preventable surgical complication, are likely to reap cognitive benefits from restored kidney function, but may be more vulnerable to longer-term neurotoxic stressors post-KT (i.e., aging, immunosuppression). In this prospective cohort study, we measured delirium (chart-based), global cognitive function (3MS), and executive function (Trail Making Test Part B minus Part A) in 894 recipients (2009-2021) at KT, 1/3/6-months, 1-year, and annually post-KT. Dementia was ascertained using linked Medicare claims. We described repeated measures of cognitive performance (mixed effects model) and quantified dementia risk (Fine & Gray competing risk) by post-KT delirium. Of 894 recipients, 43(4.8%) had post-KT delirium. Delirium was not associated with global cognitive function at KT (difference = -3.2 points, 95%CI: -6.7, 0.4) or trajectories post-KT (0.03 points/month, 95%CI: -0.27, 0.33). Delirium was associated with worse executive function at KT (55.1 s, 95%CI: 25.6, 84.5), greater improvements in executive function <2 years post-KT (-2.73 s/month, 95%CI: -4.46,-0.99), and greater decline in executive function >2 years post-KT (1.72 s/month, 95%CI: 0.22, 3.21). Post-KT delirium was associated with over 7-fold greater risk of dementia post-KT (adjusted subdistribution hazard ratio = 7.84, 95%CI: 1.22, 50.40). Transplant centers should be aware of cognitive risks associated with post-KT delirium and implement available preventative interventions to reduce delirium risk.

BACKGROUND & AIMS:Adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) offers an opportunity to decrease the liver transplant waitlist and reduce waitlist mortality. We sought to compare donor and recipient characteristics and post-transplant outcomes after LDLT in the US, the UK, and Canada. METHODS:This is a retrospective multicenter cohort-study of adults (≥18-years) who underwent primary LDLT between Jan-2008 and Dec-2018 from three national liver transplantation registries: United Network for Organ Sharing (US), National Health Service Blood and Transplantation (UK), and the Canadian Organ Replacement Registry (Canada). Patients undergoing retransplantation or multi-organ transplantation were excluded. Post-transplant survival was evaluated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and multivariable adjustments were performed using Cox proportional-hazards models with mixed-effect modeling. RESULTS:A total of 2,954 living donor liver transplants were performed (US: n = 2,328; Canada: n = 529; UK: n = 97). Canada has maintained the highest proportion of LDLT utilization over time (proportion of LDLT in 2008 - US: 3.3%; Canada: 19.5%; UK: 1.7%; p <0.001 - in 2018 - US: 5.0%; Canada: 13.6%; UK: 0.4%; p <0.001). The 1-, 5-, and 10-year patient survival was 92.6%, 82.8%, and 70.0% in the US vs. 96.1%, 89.9%, and 82.2% in Canada vs. 91.4%, 85.4%, and 66.7% in the UK. After adjustment for characteristics of donors, recipients, transplant year, and treating transplant center as a random effect, all countries had a non-statistically significantly different mortality hazard post-LDLT (Ref US: Canada hazard ratio 0.53, 95% CI 0.28-1.01, p = 0.05; UK hazard ratio 1.09, 95% CI 0.59-2.02, p = 0.78). CONCLUSIONS:The use of LDLT has remained low in the US, the UK and Canada. Despite this, long-term survival is excellent. Continued efforts to increase LDLT utilization in these countries may be warranted due to the growing waitlist and differences in allocation that may disadvantage patients currently awaiting liver transplantation. LAY SUMMARY:This multicenter international comparative analysis of living donor liver transplantation in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Canada demonstrates that despite low use of the procedure, the long-term outcomes are excellent. In addition, the mortality risk is not statistically significantly different between the evaluated countries. However, the incidence and risk of retransplantation differs between the countries, being the highest in the United Kingdom and lowest in the United States.