Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:The growth of the US geriatric population coupled with the rise in thyroid nodular disease and cancer will result in an increased number of thyroidectomies performed in older adults. We aim to evaluate outcomes after thyroidectomy in older adults as compared with younger adults. METHODS:test and multivariate logistic regression to estimate risk of outcomes. RESULTS:Our study identified 60,990 patients who underwent thyroidectomy: 47,855 (78.4%) patients between 18 and 64 y old, 11,716 (19.2%) between 65 and 79 y old, and 1419 (2.3%) ≥80 y. Compared with younger adults, patients aged ≥80 y were 2.67 times more likely to develop a complication (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.02-3.53, P < 0.001), 1.83 times more likely to be readmitted for any reason (95% CI: 1.40-2.38, P < 0.001), 1.54 times more likely to be readmitted for a reason related to the thyroidectomy (95% CI: 1.10-2.16, P < 0.05), and 1.66 times more likely to have an extended hospital stay (95% CI: 1.44-1.91, P < 0.001). Patients aged 65-79 y were 1.40 times more likely to develop a complication (95% CI: 1.19-1.63, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS:Patients aged ≥65 y have significantly higher rates of overall complications. In addition, patients aged ≥80 y have higher rates of total and thyroidectomy-related readmissions and extended length of hospital stay.

Organs from deceased donors with suspected false-positive HIV screening tests were generally discarded due to the chance that the test was truly positive. However, the HIV Organ Policy Equity (HOPE) Act now facilitates use of such organs for transplantation to HIV-infected (HIV+) individuals. In the HOPE in Action trial, donors without a known HIV infection who unexpectedly tested positive for anti-HIV antibody (Ab) or HIV nucleic acid test (NAT) were classified as suspected false-positive donors. Between March 2016 and March 2018, 10 suspected false-positive donors had organs recovered for transplant for 21 HIV + recipients (14 single-kidney, 1 double-kidney, 5 liver, 1 simultaneous liver-kidney). Median donor age was 24 years; cause of death was trauma (n = 5), stroke (n = 4), and anoxia (n = 1); three donors were labeled Public Health Service increased infectious risk. Median kidney donor profile index was 30.5 (IQR 22-58). Eight donors were HIV Ab+/NAT-; two were HIV Ab-/NAT+. All 10 suspected false-positive donors were confirmed to be HIV-noninfected. Given the false-positive rates of approved assays used to screen > 20 000 deceased donors annually, we estimate 50-100 HIV false-positive donors per year. Organ transplantation from suspected HIV false-positive donors is an unexpected benefit of the HOPE Act that provides another novel organ source.

BACKGROUND:The donation of multiple allografts from a single living donor is a rare practice, and the patient characteristics and outcomes associated with these procedures are not well described. METHODS:Using the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients, we identified 101 living multiorgan donors and their 133 recipients. RESULTS:The 49 sequential (donations during separate procedures) multiorgan donors provided grafts to 81 recipients: 21 kidney-then-liver, 15 liver-then-kidney, 5 lung-then-kidney, 3 liver-then-intestine, 3 kidney-then-pancreas, 1 lung-then-liver, and 1 pancreas-then-kidney. Of these donors, 38% donated 2 grafts to the same recipient and 15% donated 2 grafts as non-directed donors. Compared to recipients from first-time, single organ living donors, recipients from second-time living donors had similar graft and patient survival. The 52 simultaneous (multiple donations during one procedure) multiorgan donors provided 2 grafts to 1 recipient each: 48 kidney-pancreas and 4 liver-intestine. Donors had median of 13.4 years (interquartile range, 8.3-18.5 years) of follow-up. There was one reported death of a sequential donor (2.5 years after second donation). Few postdonation complications were reported over a median of 116 days (interquartile range, 0-295 days) of follow-up; however, routine living donor follow-up data were sparse. Recipients of kidneys from second-time living donors had similar graft (P = 0.2) and patient survival (P = 0.4) when compared with recipients from first-time living donors. Similarly, recipients of livers from second-time living donors had similar graft survival (P = 0.9) and patient survival (P = 0.7) when compared with recipients from first-time living donors. CONCLUSIONS:Careful documentation of outcomes is needed to ensure ethical practices in selection, informed consent, and postdonation care of this unique donor community.

Background/UNASSIGNED:Variation in the use of immunosuppression regimens after liver transplant has not been well described. Methods/UNASSIGNED:Immunosuppression regimens used after liver transplant were identified in a novel database integrating national transplant registry and pharmacy fill records for 24 238 recipients (2006-2014). Bilevel hierarchical models were developed to quantify the effects of transplant program, recipient, and donor characteristics on regimen choice. Results/UNASSIGNED:=0.003). Conclusions/UNASSIGNED:Liver transplant immunosuppression is dominantly driven by program preference, but case factors also affect regimen choice. This variation frames a natural experiment for future evaluations of comparative efficacy.

One criticism of kidney paired donation (KPD) is that easy-to-match candidates leave the registry quickly, thus concentrating the pool with hard-to-match sensitized and blood type O candidates. We studied candidate/donor pairs who registered with the National Kidney Registry (NKR), the largest US KPD clearinghouse, from January 2012-June 2016. There were no changes in age, gender, BMI, race, ABO blood type, or panel-reactive antibody (PRA) of newly registering candidates over time, with consistent registration of hard-to-match candidates (59% type O and 38% PRA ≥97%). However, there was no accumulation of type O candidates over time, presumably due to increasing numbers of nondirected type O donors. Although there was an initial accumulation of candidates with PRA ≥97% (from 33% of the pool in 2012% to 43% in 2014, P = .03), the proportion decreased to 17% by June 2016 (P < .001). Some of this is explained by an increase in the proportion of candidates with PRA ≥97% who underwent a deceased donor kidney transplantation (DDKT) after the implementation of the Kidney Allocation System (KAS), from 8% of 2012 registrants to 17% of 2015 registrants (P = .02). In this large KPD clearinghouse, increasing participation of nondirected donors and the KAS have lessened the accumulation of hard-to-match candidates, but highly sensitized candidates remain hard-to-match.

We hypothesized that cholecystectomy may be riskier for kidney transplant recipients (KTR) given their lifelong immunosuppression, physiologic impact of renal failure, and increased risk of gallstone and biliary disease. Using NIS, we compared mortality, morbidity, length of stay and cost in KTR vs non-KTR following cholecystectomy in the US from 2000 to 2011, adjusting for patient and hospital level factors, including transplant center status. Mortality was higher (OR 2.4), morbidity was higher (OR 1.3), LOS was longer (ratio 1.2), and costs were greater (ratio 1.1) for KTR compared to non-KTR following cholecystectomy. While it is clear that KTR are a high risk group following cholecystectomy, the cause of this increased risk requires further investigation.

BACKGROUND:HIV+ donor organs can now be transplanted into HIV+ recipients (HIV D+/R+) following the HIV Organ Policy Equity (HOPE) Act. Implementation of the HOPE Act requires transplant center awareness and support of HIV D+/R+ transplants. METHODS:To assess center-level barriers to implementation, we surveyed 209 transplant centers on knowledge, attitudes, and planned HIV D+/R+ protocols. RESULTS:Responding centers (n = 114; 56%) represented all UNOS regions. Fifty centers (93 organ programs) planned HIV D+/R+ protocols (kidney n = 48, liver n = 34, pancreas n = 8, heart n = 2, lung = 1), primarily in the eastern United States (28/50). Most (91.2%) were aware that HIV D+/R+ transplantation is legal; 21.4% were unaware of research restrictions. Respondents generally agreed with HOPE research criteria except the required experience with ≥5 HIV+ transplants by organ type. Centers planning HIV D+/R+ protocols had higher transplant volume, HIV+ recipient volume, increased infectious risk donor utilization, and local HIV prevalence (P < 0.01). Centers not planning HIV D+/R+ protocols were more likely to believe their HIV+ candidates would not accept HIV+ donor organs (P < 0.001). Most centers (83.2%) supported HIV+ living donation. CONCLUSIONS:Although many programs plan HIV D+/R+ transplantation, center-level barriers remain including geographic clustering of kidney/liver programs and concerns about HIV+ candidate willingness to accept HIV+ donor organs.