Faculty Bibliography

Performing third or fourth kidney transplantation (3KT and 4KT) in older patients is rare due to surgical and immunologic challenges. We aimed to analyze and compare the outcomes of younger (18-64 years) and older (≥65 years) recipients of 3KT and 4KT. Between 1990 and 2016, we identified 5816 recipients of 3KTs (153 were older) and 886 recipients of 4KTs (18 were older). The incidences of delayed graft function (24.3% vs. 24.8%, p = .89), primary non-function (3.2% vs. 1.3%, p = .21), 1-year acute rejection (18.6% vs. 14.8%, p = .24), and 5-year death censored graft failure (DCGF) (24.8% vs. 17.9%, p = .06) were not different between younger and older recipients of 3KT. However, 5-year mortality was higher in older recipients (14.0% vs. 33.8%, p < .001) which remained significant after adjustment (aHR = 3.21, 95% CI: 2.59-3.99). Similar patterns were noted in the 4KT cohort. When compared with waitlisted patients, 3KT and 4KT are associated with a lower risk of mortality; aHR = 0.37, 95% CI: 0.33-0.41 and aHR = 0.31, 95% CI: 0.24-0.41, respectively. This survival benefit did not differ by recipient age (younger vs. older, p for interaction = 3KT: .49 and 4KT: .58). In the largest cohort described to date, we report that there is a survival benefit of 3KT and 4KT even among older patients. Although a highly selected cohort, our results support improving access to 3KT and 4KT.

Importance:Traditionally, liver transplant (LT) for alcohol-associated liver disease (ALD) requires 6 months of abstinence. Although early LT before 6 months of abstinence has been associated with decreased mortality for decompensated ALD, this practice remains controversial and concentrated at a few centers. Objective:To define patient, allograft, and relapse-free survival in early LT for ALD, and to investigate the association between these survival outcomes and early vs standard LT. Design, Setting, and Participants:This cohort study analyzed all patients with ALD who underwent their first LT at a single academic referral center between October 1, 2012, and November 13, 2020. Patients with known pretransplant hepatocellular carcinoma, hepatitis B or C, or an alternative cause of liver failure were excluded. Follow-up period was defined as the time from LT to the most recent encounter with a transplant center or death. Exposures:The exposure of interest was early LT, which was defined as less than 180 days of pre-LT abstinence. Standard LT was defined as 180 days or more of pre-LT abstinence. Patients were separated into early LT and standard LT by time from abstinence to LT. Main Outcomes and Measures:The outcomes were patient, allograft, relapse-free, and hazardous relapse-free survival for patients who underwent early LT or standard LT. These groups were compared by log-rank testing of Kaplan-Meier estimates. Hazardous relapse was defined as binge, at-risk, or frequent drinking. Abstinence was reassessed at the most recent follow-up visit for all patients. Results:Of the 163 patients with ALD included in this study, 88 (54%) underwent early LT and 75 (46%) underwent standard LT. This cohort had a mean (SD) age at transplant of 52 (10) years and was predominantly composed of 108 male patients (66%). Recipients of early LT vs standard LT were younger (median [interquartile range (IQR)] age, 49.7 [39.0-54.2] years vs 54.6 [48.7-60.0] years; P < .001) and had a higher median (IQR) Model for End-stage Liver Disease score at listing (35.0 [29.0-39.0] vs 20.0 [13.0-26.0]; P < .001). Both recipients of early LT and standard LT had similar 1-year patient survival (94.1% [95% CI, 86.3%-97.5%] vs 95.9% [95% CI, 87.8%-98.7%]; P = .60), allograft survival (92.7% [95% CI, 84.4%-96.7%] vs 90.5% [95% CI, 81.0%-95.3%]; P = .42), relapse-free survival (80.4% [95% CI, 69.1%-88.0%] vs 83.5% [95% CI, 72.2%-90.6%]; P = .41), and hazardous relapse-free survival (85.8% [95% CI, 75.1%-92.2%] vs 89.6% [95% CI, 79.5%-94.9%]; P = .41). Conclusions and Relevance:Adherence to the 6-month rule was not associated with superior patient survival, allograft survival, or relapse-free survival among selected patients. This finding suggests that patients with ALD should not be categorically excluded from LT solely on the basis of 6 months of abstinence, but rather alternative selection criteria should be identified that are based on need and posttransplant outcomes.

Background/UNASSIGNED:) transplantation involves ethical considerations related to safety, consent, stigma, and privacy, which could be better understood through studying patients' actual experiences. Methods/UNASSIGNED:transplantation at 4 centers regarding their decision-making process, the informed consent process, and posttransplant experiences. Participants were interviewed at-transplant (≤3 wk after transplant), posttransplant (≥3 mo after transplant), or both time points. Interviews were analyzed thematically using constant comparison of inductive and deductive coding. Results/UNASSIGNED:transplant candidates were unable to receive HIV-noninfected donor organs. Conclusions/UNASSIGNED:transplant candidates regarding available treatment options and for transplant teams regarding privacy and stigma concerns would be beneficial.

Background/UNASSIGNED:Among adult kidney transplant (KT) recipients, the risk of post-KT adverse outcomes differs by type of induction immunosuppression. Immune response to induction differs as recipients age; yet, choice of induction is barely tailored by age likely due to a lack of evidence of the risks and benefits. Methods/UNASSIGNED:Using Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients data, we identified 39336 first-time KT recipients (2010-2016). We estimated the length of stay (LOS), acute rejection (AR), graft failure, and death by induction type using logistic and Cox regression weighted by propensity score to adjust for confounders. We tested whether these estimates differed by age (65+ versus 18-64 y) using a Wald test. Results/UNASSIGNED: = 0.03 and 0.003) differed by recipient age. Discharge was on average 11% shorter in rATG among younger recipients (relative time = 0.89; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.81-0.99) but not among older recipients (relative time = 1.01; 95% CI, 0.95-1.08). rATG was not associated with mortality among older (hazard ratio = 1.05; 95% CI, 0.96-1.15), but among younger recipients (hazard ratio = 0.87; 95% CI, 0.80-0.95), it was associated with reduced mortality risk. Conclusions/UNASSIGNED:rATG should be considered to prevent AR, especially among recipients with high-immunologic risk regardless of age; however, choice of induction should be tailored to reduce LOS and risk of mortality, particularly among younger recipients.

Background/UNASSIGNED:Despite the revolutionary role of direct-acting antivirals for hepatitis C virus (HCV), the treatment timing for liver transplant candidates remains controversial. We hypothesize that deferring treatment until after liver transplantation improves access to a larger and higher-quality donor pool without a detrimental impact on post-liver transplantation outcomes. Methods/UNASSIGNED:This single-center study includes recipients that underwent deceased-donor liver transplant with HCV as the primary indication January 1, 2014, to December 31, 2018. For recipients that were untreated (n = 87) versus treated (n = 42) pre-LT, we compared post-LT mortality using Cox regression with inverse probability of treatment-weighted data. Results/UNASSIGNED: = 0.06). Conclusions/UNASSIGNED:Deferring HCV treatment improves access to higher-quality donors and may improve post-LT survival.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has had a variable course across the United States. Understanding its evolving impact on heart and lung transplantation (HT and LT) will help with planning for next phases of this pandemic as well as future ones.