Faculty Bibliography

Objectives/UNASSIGNED:Psychosocial factors are important predictors of medication adherence, and subsequently graft survival, in solid organ transplantation. Early experiences suggest this may also be the case in vascularized composite allotransplantation. Methods/UNASSIGNED:, 5th Edition), and social support (Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support). Medication adherence among vascularized composite allotransplantation recipients at two centers was assessed by a member of the clinical research team using the recipients' medical records. Results/UNASSIGNED:Medication adherence was reported for 12 vascularized composite allotransplantation recipients, and 9 vascularized composite allotransplantation recipients completed psychosocial assessments. Most recipients were believed to be adherent to their immunosuppression, however, three recipients were believed to be non-adherent and a member of the clinical team had discussed non-adherence at least once with five recipients. Results from the psychosocial assessment (n = 9) indicated that eight participants had high levels of social support, and eight demonstrated high levels of conscientiousness which have been associated with better medication adherence in solid organ transplantation. However, three participants demonstrated mild anxiety, two demonstrated minimal symptoms of depression, and one demonstrated post-traumatic stress disorder which have been associated with worse medication adherence in solid organ transplantation. Conclusion/UNASSIGNED:These findings lay the groundwork for future assessments of the role psychosocial factors play in facilitating medication adherence and broader transplant outcomes.

BACKGROUND:Frailty, originally characterized in community-dwelling older adults, is increasingly being studied and implemented for adult patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) of all ages (>18 years). Frailty prevalence and manifestation are unclear in younger adults (18-64 years) with ESKD; differences likely exist based on whether the patients are treated with hemodialysis (HD) or kidney transplantation (KT). METHODS:We leveraged 3 cohorts: 378 adults initiating HD (2008-2012), 4,304 adult KT candidates (2009-2019), and 1,396 KT recipients (2008-2019). The frailty phenotype was measured within 6 months of dialysis initiation, at KT evaluation, and KT admission. Prevalence of frailty and its components was estimated by age (≥65 vs. <65 years). A Wald test for interactions was used to test whether risk factors for frailty differed by age. RESULTS:In all 3 cohorts, frailty prevalence was higher among older than younger adults (HD: 71.4 vs. 47.3%; candidates: 25.4 vs. 18.8%; recipients: 20.8 vs. 14.3%). In all cohorts, older patients were more likely to have slowness and weakness but less likely to report exhaustion. Among candidates, older age (odds ratio [OR] = 1.79, 95% CI: 1.47-2.17), non-Hispanic black race (OR = 1.30, 95% CI: 1.08-1.57), and dialysis type (HD vs. no dialysis: OR = 2.06, 95% CI: 1.61-2.64; peritoneal dialysis vs. no dialysis: OR = 1.78, 95% CI: 1.28-2.48) were associated with frailty prevalence, but sex and Hispanic ethnicity were not. These associations did not differ by age (pinteractions > 0.1). Similar results were observed for recipients and HD patients. CONCLUSIONS:Although frailty prevalence increases with age, younger patients have a high burden. Clinicians caring for this vulnerable population should recognize that younger patients may experience frailty and screen all age groups.

Importance:Among liver transplant candidates, obesity and frailty are associated with increased risk of death while they are on the wait-list. However, use of body mass index (BMI) may not detect candidates at a higher risk of death owing to the fact that ascites and muscle wasting are seen across transplant candidates of all BMI measurements. Objective:To evaluate whether the association between wait-list mortality and frailty varied by BMI of liver transplant candidates. Design, Setting, and Participants:A prospective cohort study was conducted at 9 liver transplant centers in the United States from March 1, 2012, to May 1, 2018, among 1108 adult liver transplant candidates without hepatocellular carcinoma. Exposures:At outpatient evaluation, the Liver Frailty Index score was calculated (grip strength, chair stands, and balance), with frailty defined as a Liver Frailty Index score of 4.5 or more. Candidates' BMI was categorized as nonobese (18.5-29.9), class 1 obesity (30.0-34.9), and class 2 or greater obesity (≥35.0). Main Outcomes and Measures:The risk of wait-list mortality was quantified using competing risks regression by candidate frailty, adjusting for age, sex, race/ethnicity, Model for End-stage Liver Disease Sodium score, cause of liver disease, and ascites, including an interaction with candidate BMI. Results:Of 1108 liver transplant candidates (474 women and 634 men; mean [SD] age, 55 [10] years), 290 (26.2%) were frail; 170 of 670 nonobese candidates (25.4%), 64 of 246 candidates with class 1 obesity (26.0%), and 56 of 192 candidates with class 2 or greater obesity (29.2%) were frail (P = .57). Frail nonobese candidates and frail candidates with class 1 obesity had a higher risk of wait-list mortality compared with their nonfrail counterparts (nonobese candidates: adjusted subhazard ratio, 1.54; 95% CI, 1.02-2.33; P = .04; and candidates with class 1 obesity: adjusted subhazard ratio, 1.72; 95% CI, 0.99-2.99; P = .06; P = .75 for interaction). However, frail candidates with class 2 or greater obesity had a 3.19-fold higher adjusted risk of wait-list mortality compared with nonfrail candidates with class 2 or greater obesity (95% CI, 1.75-5.82; P < .001; P = .047 for interaction). Conclusions and Relevance:This study's finding suggest that among nonobese liver transplant candidates and candidates with class 1 obesity, frailty was associated with a 2-fold higher risk of wait-list mortality. However, the mortality risk associated with frailty differed for candidates with class 2 or greater obesity, with frail candidates having a more than 3-fold higher risk of wait-list mortality compared with nonfrail patients. Frailty assessments may help to identify vulnerable patients, particularly those with a BMI of 35.0 or more, in whom a clinician's visual evaluation may be less reliable to assess muscle mass and nutritional status.

Impacts of the prescription opioid epidemic have not yet been examined in the context of heart transplantation. We examined a novel database in which national U.S. transplant registry records were linked to a large pharmaceutical claims warehouse (2007-2016) to characterize prescription opioid use before and after heart transplant, and associations (adjusted hazard ratio, _{95% LCL} aHR_{95% UCL} ) with death and graft loss. Among 13 958 eligible patients, 40% filled opioids in the year before transplant. Use was more common among recipients who were female, white, or unemployed, or who underwent transplant in more recent years. Of those with the highest level of pretransplant opioid use, 71% continued opioid use posttransplant. Pretransplant use had graded associations with 1-year posttransplant outcomes; compared with no use, the highest-level use (>1000 mg morphine equivalents) predicted 33% increased risk of death (aHR _1.10 1.33_1.61 ) in the year after transplant. Risk relationships with opioid use in the first year posttransplant were stronger, with highest level use predicting 70% higher mortality (aHR _1.46 1.70_1.98 ) over the subsequent 4 years (from >1 to 5 years posttransplant). While associations may, in part, reflect underlying conditions or behaviors, opioid use history is relevant in assessing and providing care to transplant candidates and recipients.

INTRODUCTION:Newly discovered thyroid nodules in deceased donors are investigated to rule out cancer that can be transmitted, but there are no established protocols. The aim of the study was to compare fine needle aspiration versus intraoperative frozen section in the donor management with limited time. METHODS:Data were extracted only from the records of Italian second opinion consultation service in the years 2016 to 2017 and included donor details, pathology diagnoses, complications, transmission risk profile, and impact on transplantation. RESULTS:Among 31 deceased donors with thyroid nodules, we documented 4 with a clinical history of cancer and 27 with a newly discovered nodule. The latter was evaluated by thyroidectomy with frozen section in 22 and fine needle aspiration in 5. Among all donors, 7 had papillary thyroid carcinoma with negligible transmission risk, whereas 8 with unacceptable risk. Two donors presented major bleeding after thyroidectomy, with organ discard in 1 case. Transplantation was delayed in 4 cases that were evaluated with frozen section. DISCUSSION:There was no uniform approach for the investigation of thyroid nodules. Our results showed that fine needle aspiration was more accurate and useful than frozen section. Fine needle aspiration had minor economic impact and a far less rate of bleeding/hemodynamic complications, potentially delaying and compromising organ recovery. Our results suggested considering fine needle aspiration as a first step in the evaluation of thyroid nodules in donors.

BACKGROUND:Kidneys from infectious risk donors (IRD) confer substantial survival benefit in adults, yet the benefit of IRD kidneys to pediatric candidates remains unclear in the context of high waitlist prioritization. METHODS:Using 2010-2016 Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients data, we studied 2417 pediatric candidates (age <18 y) who were offered an IRD kidney that was eventually used for transplantation. We followed candidates from the date of first IRD kidney offer until the date of death or censorship and used Cox regression to estimate mortality risk associated with IRD kidney acceptance versus decline, adjusting for age, sex, race, diagnosis, and dialysis time. RESULTS:Over the study period, 2250 (93.1%) pediatric candidates declined and 286 (11.8%) accepted an IRD kidney offer; 119 (41.6%) of the 286 had previously declined a different IRD kidney. Cumulative survival among those who accepted versus declined the IRD kidney was 99.6% versus 99.4% and 96.3% versus 97.8% 1 and 6 years post decision, respectively (P = 0.1). Unlike the substantial survival benefit seen in adults (hazard ratio = 0.52), among pediatric candidates, we did not detect a survival benefit associated with accepting an IRD kidney (adjusted hazard ratio: 0.791.723.73, P = 0.2). However, those who declined IRD kidneys waited a median 9.6 months for a non-IRD kidney transplant (11.2 mo among those <6 y, 8.8 mo among those on dialysis). Kidney donor profile index (KDPI) of the eventually accepted non-IRD kidneys (median = 13, interquartile range = 6-23) was similar to KDPI of the declined IRD kidneys (median = 16, interquartile range = 9-28). CONCLUSIONS:Unlike in adults, IRD kidneys conferred no survival benefit to pediatric candidates, although they did reduce waiting times. The decision to accept IRD kidneys should balance the advantage of faster transplantation against the risk of infectious transmission.

BACKGROUND:Recipients of nonkidney solid organ transplants (nkSOT) are living longer, and 11%-18% will develop end stage renal disease (ESRD). While our general inclination is to treat nkSOT recipients who develop ESRD with a kidney transplant (KT), an increasing number are developing ESRD at an older age where KT may not be the most appropriate treatment. It is possible that the risk of older age and prior nkSOT might synergize to make KT too risky, but this has never been explored. METHODS:To examine death-censored graft loss and mortality for KT recipients with and without prior nkSOT, we used Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients data to identify 42 089 older (age ≥65) KT recipients between 1995 and 2016. Additionally, to better understand treatment options for these patients and survival benefit of KT, we identified 5023 older (age ≥65) with prior nkSOT recipients listed for subsequent KT, of whom 863 received transplants. RESULTS:Compared with 41 159 older KT recipients without prior nkSOT, death-censored graft loss was similar (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 1.13, 95% CI: 0.93-1.37, P = 0.2), but mortality (aHR: 1.40, 95% CI: 1.28-1.54, P < 0.001) was greater for older KT recipients with prior nkSOT. Nonetheless, in a survival benefit model (survival with versus without the transplant), among older prior nkSOT recipients, KT decreased the risk of mortality by more than half (aHR: 0.47, 95% CI: 0.42-0.54, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS:Older prior nkSOT recipients who subsequently develop ESRD derive survival benefit from KT, but graft longevity is limited by overall survival in this population. These findings can help guide patient counseling for this challenging population.

Using nonideal kidneys for transplant quickly might reduce the discard rate of kidney transplants. We studied changing kidney allocation to eliminate sequential offers, instead making offers to multiple centers for all nonlocally allocated kidneys, so that multiple centers must accept or decline within the same 1 hour. If more than 1 center accepted an offer, the kidney would go to the highest-priority accepting candidate. Using 2010 Kidney-Pancreas Simulated Allocation Model-Scientific Registry for Transplant Recipients data, we simulated the allocation of 12 933 kidneys, excluding locally allocated and zero-mismatch kidneys. We assumed that each hour of delay decreased the probability of acceptance by 5% and that kidneys would be discarded after 20 hours of offers beyond the local level. We simulated offering kidneys simultaneously to small, medium-size, and large batches of centers. Increasing the batch size increased the percentage of kidneys accepted and shortened allocation times. Going from small to large batches increased the number of kidneys accepted from 10 085 (92%) to 10 802 (98%) for low-Kidney Donor Risk Index kidneys and from 1257 (65%) to 1737 (89%) for high-Kidney Donor Risk Index kidneys. The average number of offers that a center received each week was 10.1 for small batches and 16.8 for large batches. Simultaneously expiring offers might allow faster allocation and decrease the number of discards, while still maintaining an acceptable screening burden.