Faculty Bibliography

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.

BACKGROUND:Despite the societal benefits of live kidney donation, Black donors may be more likely than White donors to develop hypertension (HTN) and chronic kidney disease after donation. Among live kidney donors diagnosed with post-donation HTN, little is known about potential racial/ethnic differences in HTN self-care behaviors and perceived susceptibility to developing kidney disease. METHODS:We ascertained electronic medical records and phone survey data from live donors enrolled in the multi-center Wellness and Health Outcomes of LivE Donors (WHOLE-Donor) Hypertension Care Study between May 2013 and April 2020. Using multivariable logistic regression models performed January through June 2021, we examined potential associations of donor race/ethnicity with perceived susceptibility to kidney disease and self-care behaviors (ie, Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System measure assessing self-reported actions to control high blood pressure). RESULTS:The study included 318 US-based live kidney donors who developed post-donation HTN (57.6% female; 78.9% White; 18.6% Black; and mean age 46.7 years at donation). Black donors were equally as likely as White donors to report being moderately or strongly concerned about developing kidney disease (adjusted odds ratio, aOR: 1.27, 95%CI: .66, 2.14, P=.57). Donors with diabetes were more likely than those without diabetes (aOR: 2.43, 95%CI: 1.03, 5.01, P=.04), while donors aged >50 years were less likely than younger donors (aOR: .39, 95%CI: .18, .85, P=.02) to report being moderately or strongly concerned about kidney disease. Overall, 87% of donors reported taking at least one action to help control blood pressure, with no significant differences by sociodemographic factors. CONCLUSIONS:We found no substantial differences in perceived susceptibility to kidney disease among Black and White donors, despite published evidence that Black donors may experience greater risk of developing kidney disease than White donors. Behavioral interventions to enhance knowledge about future disease risk, attitudes, and self-care strategies among living kidney donors may be beneficial.

UNLABELLED:Automation of deceased donor referrals with standardized clinical triggers allows organ procurement organizations to be rapidly aware of medically eligible potential donors without the need for manual reporting and subjective decision-making of otherwise very busy hospital staff. In October 2018, 3 Texas hospitals (pilot hospitals) began using an automated referral system; our goal was to evaluate the impact of this system on eligible donor referral. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:We studied ventilated referrals (n = 28 034) in a single organ procurement organization from January 2015 to March 2021. We estimated the change in referral rate in the 3 pilot hospitals due to the automated referral system using a difference-in-differences analysis with Poisson regression. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:). CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:Following deployment of an automated referral system that did not require any actions by the referring hospital, referrals, authorizations, and organ donors increased substantially in the 3 pilot hospitals. Broader deployment of automated referral systems may lead to increases in the deceased donor pool.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:A comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) tailored to the chronic kidney disease (CKD) population would yield a more targeted approach to assessment and care. We aimed to identify domains of a CKD-specific CGA (CKD-CGA), characterize patterns of these domains, and evaluate their predictive utility on adverse health outcomes. METHODS:We used data from 864 participants in the Chronic Renal Insufficiency Cohort aged ≥55 years and not on dialysis. Constituents of the CKD-CGA were selected a priori. Latent class analysis informed the selection of domains and identified classes of participants based on their domain patterns. The predictive utility of class membership on mortality, dialysis initiation, and hospitalization was examined. Model discrimination was assessed with C-statistics. RESULTS:The CKD-CGA included 16 domains: cardiovascular disease, diabetes, five frailty phenotype components, depressive symptoms, cognition, five kidney disease quality-of-life components, health literacy, and medication use. A two-class latent class model fit the data best, with 34.7% and 65.3% in the high- and low-burden of geriatric conditions classes, respectively. Relative to the low-burden class, participants in the high-burden class were at increased risk of mortality (aHR = 2.09; 95% CI: 1.56, 2.78), dialysis initiation (aHR = 1.63; 95% CI: 1.06, 2.52), and hospitalization (aOR = 2.00; 95% CI: 1.38, 2.88). Model discrimination was the strongest for dialysis initiation (C-statistics = 0.86) and moderate for mortality and hospitalization (C-statistics = 0.70 and 0.66, respectively). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:With further validation in an external cohort, the CKD-CGA has the potential to be used in nephrology practices for assessing and managing geriatric conditions in older adults with CKD.

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.

Vascularized Composite Allotransplantation (VCA) involves transplantation of multiple tissues from a donor to a recipient (e.g., skin, muscle, bone). Little is known about the US public's perceptions of and attitudes toward VCA organ donation. This multi-site, cross-sectional, mixed methods study involved focus groups and surveys to assess members of the general public's attitudes about VCA, and willingness and barriers to donate VCA organs. Qualitative data were analyzed by thematic analysis; quantitative data were analyzed by descriptive statistics. In focus groups (n = 6, 42 participants), most participants were female (57%) and Black (62%) with mean age of 42.6 years. Three main themes emerged: 1) awareness and perceptions of VCA, 2) purpose of VCA donation, 3) and barriers to VCA donation. Participants had heard little about VCA and sought information about VCA donation. Participants perceived VCA as challenging their concepts of "normality" and voiced concerns that VCA would create "Frankenstein[s]." Barriers to VCA donation included disruptions to end-of-life arrangements and information gaps regarding the donation process. Participants reported moderate to high willingness to donate their hands (69%) and face (50%) Public education efforts should address the specific needs and concerns of the public to facilitate VCA donation and family authorization.

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.

BACKGROUND:Approval of living kidney donors (LKD) with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) risk factors, such as obesity, has increased. While lifetime ESKD development data are lacking, the study of intermediate outcomes such as diabetes is critical for LKD safety. Donation-attributable diabetes risk among persons with obesity remains unknown. The purpose of this study was to evaluate 10-year diabetes-free survival among LKDs and non-donors with obesity. METHODS:This longitudinal cohort study identified adult, LKDs (1976-2020) from 42 US transplant centers and non-donors from the Coronary Artery Risk Development in Young Adults (1985-1986) and the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (1987-1989) studies with body mass index ≥30 kg/m2. LKDs were matched to non-donors on baseline characteristics (age, sex, race, body mass index, systolic and diastolic blood pressure) plus diabetes-specific risk factors (family history of diabetes, impaired fasting glucose, smoking history). Accelerated failure time models were utilized to evaluate 10-year diabetes-free survival. FINDINGS:Among 3464 participants, 1119 (32%) were LKDs and 2345 (68%) were non-donors. After matching on baseline characteristics plus diabetes-specific risk factors, 4% (7/165) LKDs and 9% (15/165) non-donors developed diabetes (median follow-up time 8.5 (IQR: 5.6-10.0) and 9.1 (IQR: 5.9-10.0) years, respectively). While not significant, LKDs were estimated to live diabetes-free 2 times longer than non-donors (estimate 1.91; 95% CI: 0.79-4.64, p = 0.15). CONCLUSIONS:LKDs with obesity trended toward living longer diabetes-free than non-donors with obesity, suggesting within the decade following donation there was no increased diabetes risk among LKDs. Further work is needed to evaluate donation-attributable diabetes risk long-term.