Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:In the context of the organ shortage, donation after circulatory death (DCD) provides an opportunity to expand the donor pool. Although deceased-donor liver transplantation from DCD donors has expanded, DCD livers continue to be discarded at elevated rates; the use of DCD livers from older donors, or donors with comorbidities, is controversial. METHODS:Using US registry data from 2009 to 2020, we identified 1564 candidates on whose behalf a DCD liver offer was accepted ("acceptors") and 16 981 candidates on whose behalf the same DCD offers were declined ("decliners"). We characterized outcomes of decliners using a competing risk framework and estimated the survival benefit (adjusted hazard ratio [95% confidence interval]) of accepting DCD livers using Cox regression. RESULTS:Within 10 y of DCD offer decline, 50.9% of candidates died or were removed from the waitlist before transplantation with any type of allograft. DCD acceptors had lower mortality compared with decliners at 10 y postoffer (35.4% versus 48.9%, P < 0.001). After adjustment for candidate covariates, DCD offer acceptance was associated with a 46% reduction in mortality (0.54 [0.49-0.61]). Acceptors of older (age ≥50), obese (body mass index ≥30), hypertensive, nonlocal, diabetic, and increased risk DCD livers had 44% (0.56 [0.42-0.73]), 40% (0.60 [0.49-0.74]), 48% (0.52 [0.41-0.66]), 46% (0.54 [0.45-0.65]), 32% (0.68 [0.43-1.05]), and 45% (0.55 [0.42-0.72]) lower mortality risk compared with DCD decliners, respectively. CONCLUSIONS:DCD offer acceptance is associated with considerable long-term survival benefits for liver transplant candidates, even with older DCD donors or donors with comorbidities. Increased recovery and utilization of DCD livers should be encouraged.

Older compatible living donor kidney transplant (CLDKT) recipients have higher mortality and death-censored graft failure (DCGF) compared to younger recipients. These risks may be amplified in older incompatible living donor kidney transplant (ILDKT) recipients who undergo desensitization and intense immunosuppression. In a 25-center cohort of ILDKT recipients transplanted between September 24, 1997, and December 15, 2016, we compared mortality, DCGF, delayed graft function (DGF), acute rejection (AR), and length of stay (LOS) between 234 older (age ≥60 years) and 1172 younger (age 18-59 years) recipients. To investigate whether the impact of age was different for ILDKT recipients compared to 17 542 CLDKT recipients, we used an interaction term to determine whether the relationship between posttransplant outcomes and transplant type (ILDKT vs CLDKT) was modified by age. Overall, older recipients had higher mortality (hazard ratio: _1.632.07_2.65, P < .001), lower DCGF (hazard ratio: _0.360.53_0.77, P = .001), and AR (odds ratio: _0.390.54_0.74, P < .001), and similar DGF (odds ratio: _0.461.03_2.33, P = .9) and LOS (incidence rate ratio: _0.880.98_1.10, P = 0.8) compared to younger recipients. The impact of age on mortality (interaction P = .052), DCGF (interaction P = .7), AR interaction P = .2), DGF (interaction P = .9), and LOS (interaction P = .5) were similar in ILDKT and CLDKT recipients. Age alone should not preclude eligibility for ILDKT.

A more granular donor kidney grading scale, the kidney donor profile index (KDPI), has recently emerged in contradistinction to the standard criteria donor/expanded criteria donor framework. In this paper, we built a Markov decision process model to evaluate the survival, quality-adjusted life years (QALY), and cost advantages of using high-KDPI kidneys based on multiple KDPI strata over a 60-month time horizon as opposed to remaining on the waiting list waiting for a lower-KDPI kidney. Data for the model were gathered from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients and the United States Renal Data System Medicare parts A, B, and D databases. Of the 129,024 phenotypes delineated in this model, 65% of them would experience a survival benefit, 81% would experience an increase in QALYs, 87% would see cost-savings, and 76% would experience cost-savings per QALY from accepting a high-KDPI kidney rather than remaining on the waiting list waiting for a kidney of lower-KDPI. Classification and regression tree analysis (CART) revealed the main drivers of increased survival in accepting high-KDPI kidneys were wait time ≥30 months, panel reactive antibody (PRA) <90, age ≥45 to 65, diagnosis leading to renal failure, and prior transplantation. The CART analysis showed the main drivers of increased QALYs in accepting high-kidneys were wait time ≥30 months, PRA <90, and age ≥55 to 65.

BACKGROUND/UNASSIGNED:Advancements in medical technology, healthcare delivery, and organ allocation resulted in improved patient/graft survival for older (age ≥65) kidney transplant (KT) recipients. However, the recent trends in these post-KT outcomes are uncertain in light of the mounting burden of cardiovascular disease, changing kidney allocation policies, heterogeneity in candidates' risk profile, and the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Thus, we examined secular trends in post-KT outcomes among older and younger KT recipients over the last 3 decades. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:We identified 73 078 older and 378 800 younger adult (aged 18-64) recipients using Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (1990-2022). KTs were grouped into 6 prepandemic eras and 1 postpandemic-onset era. Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards models were used to examine temporal trends in post-KT mortality and death-censored graft failure. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:From 1990 to 2022, a 19-fold increase in the proportion of older KT recipients was observed compared to a 2-fold increase in younger adults despite a slight decline in the absolute number of older recipients in 2020. The mortality risk for older recipients between 2015 and March 14, 2020, was 39% (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] = 0.61, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.50-0.75) lower compared to 1990-1994, whereas that for younger adults was 47% lower (aHR = 0.53, 95% CI, 0.48-0.59). However, mortality risk during the pandemic was 25% lower (aHR = 0.75, 95% CI, 0.61-0.93) in older adults and 37% lower in younger adults (aHR = 0.63, 95% CI, 0.56-0.70) relative to 1990-1994. For both populations, the risk of graft failure declined over time and was unaffected during the pandemic relative to the preceding period. CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:The steady improvements in 5-y mortality and graft survival were disrupted during the pandemic, particularly among older adults. Specifically, mortality among older adults reflected rates seen 20 y prior.

Purpose of Review: This review presents an overview of the clinical syndrome of frailty and its association with kidney transplantation outcomes, recent developments in refining frailty assessment, and considerations for its implementation into kidney transplant evaluation. Recent Findings: Recent studies show that frailty is associated with adverse clinical outcomes before and after kidney transplantation, including decreased likelihood of listing and increased risks of mortality. However, frailty assessment has yet to be fully adopted by transplant centers; a study found that 40.9% of centers reported never assessing frailty at evaluation of kidney transplant candidates. Geriatric transplant experts and kidney transplant candidates agree that frailty is a valid consideration for evaluating candidacy. Summary: While frailty is an important consideration for treatment of patients with end-stage renal disease, its use in kidney transplant evaluation remains under-utilized. Future research is necessary to refine the frailty phenotype for effective integration into a kidney transplant context.