Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:Historically, donation after circulatory death (DCD) livers were frequently discarded due to higher mortality and graft loss after liver transplantation (LT). However, the demand for liver transplantation continues to outstrip the supply of "acceptable" organs. Additionally, changes in the donor pool, organ allocation, clinical management of donors and recipients, and improved clinical protocols might have altered post-DCD-LT outcomes. METHODS:We studied 5,975 recovered DCD livers using U.S. SRTR data from 2005-2017, with a comparison group of 78,235 adult DBD livers recovered during the same time period. We quantified temporal trends in discard using adjusted multilevel logistic regression and temporal trends in post-LT mortality and graft loss for DCD LT recipients using adjusted Cox regression. RESULTS:DCD livers were more likely to be discarded than DBD livers across the entire study period, and the relative likelihood of discard increased over time (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] of discard DCD vs. DBD 3.854.455.14 2005-2007, 5.225.876.59 2015-2017) despite improving outcomes after DCD LT. Mortality risk for DCD LTs decreased in each time period (compared to 2005-2007, aHR 2008-2011 0.720.840.97, aHR 2012-2014 0.480.580.70, aHR 2015-2017 0.340.430.55), as did risk of graft loss (compared to 2005-2007, aHR 2008-2011 0.690.810.94, aHR 2012-2014 0.450.550.67, aHR 2015-2017 0.360.450.56). CONCLUSIONS:Despite dramatic improvements in outcomes of DCD LT recipients, DCD livers remain substantially more likely to be discarded than DBD livers, and this discrepancy has actually increased over time. DCD livers are underutilized and have the potential to expand the donor pool.

Patient and graft survival are similar following whole versus split liver transplants (SLT) among pediatric and adult recipients, yet SLTs are rarely used. We sought to determine the survival benefit associated with accepting a splittable offer for SLT versus declining and waiting for a subsequent offer using 2010-2018 SRTR data on 928 pediatric and 1814 adult LT candidates who were ever offered a splittable graft. We compared eventual mortality, regardless of subsequent transplants, between those who accepted versus declined a splittable liver offer with adjustment for PELD/MELD, diagnosis, and weight among pediatric candidates, and matching for MELD, height, and offer among adult candidates. Among pediatric candidates ≤7kg, splittable offer acceptance versus decline was associated with a 63% reduction in mortality (aHR _0.17 0.37_0.80 , p=0.01; 93.1% versus 84.0% one-year survival post-decision). Within one year of decline for those ≤7kg, 6.4% died and 31.1% received a whole liver transplant. Among pediatric candidates >7kg, there was no significant difference associated with acceptance of a splittable offer (aHR _0.63 1.07_1.82 , p=0.81; 91.7% vs 94.4% one-year survival post-decision). Within one year of decline for those >7kg, 1.8% died and 45.8% received a whole liver. Among adult candidates, splittable offer acceptance was associated with a 43% reduction in mortality (aHR _0.39 0.57_0.83, p=0.005; 92.2% vs 84.4% one-year survival post-decision). Within one year of decline for adult candidates, 7.9% died and 39.3% received a whole liver. Conclusion: Accepting splittable offers for SLT could significantly improve survival for small children and adults on the waitlist.

Background/UNASSIGNED:Few reports have focused on newer coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) therapies (remdesivir, dexamethasone, and convalescent plasma) in solid organ transplant recipients; concerns had been raised regarding possible adverse impact on allograft function or secondary infections. Methods/UNASSIGNED:We studied 77 solid organ transplant inpatients with COVID-19 during 2 therapeutic eras (Era 1: March-May 2020, 21 patients; and Era 2: June-November 2020, 56 patients) and 52 solid organ transplant outpatients. Results/UNASSIGNED:In Era 1, no patients received remdesivir or dexamethasone, and 4 of 21 (19.4%) received convalescent plasma, whereas in Era 2, remdesivir (24/56, 42.9%), dexamethasone (24/56, 42.9%), and convalescent plasma (40/56, 71.4%) were commonly used. Mortality was low across both eras, 4 of 77 (5.6%), and rejection occurred in only 2 of 77 (2.8%) inpatients; infections were similar in hypoxemic patients with or without dexamethasone. Preexisting graft dysfunction was associated with greater need for hospitalization, higher severity score, and lower survival. Acute kidney injury was present in 37.3% of inpatients; renal function improved more rapidly in patients who received remdesivir and convalescent plasma. Post-COVID-19 renal and liver function were comparable between eras, out to 90 d. Conclusions/UNASSIGNED:Newer COVID-19 therapies did not appear to have a deleterious effect on allograft function, and infectious complications were comparable.