The organ procurement costs of expanding deceased donor organ acceptance criteria: Evidence from a cost function model

A potential solution to the deceased donor organ shortage is to expand donor acceptability criteria. The procurement cost implications of using nonstandard donors is unknown. Using 5 years of US organ procurement organization (OPO) data, we built a cost function model to make cost projections: the total cost was the dependent variable; production outputs, including the number of donors and organs procured, were the independent variables. In the model, procuring one kidney or procuring both kidneys from double/en bloc transplantation from a single-organ donor resulted in a marginal cost of $55 k (95% confidence interval [CI] $28 k, $99 k) per kidney, and procuring only the liver from a single-organ donor results in a marginal cost of $41 k (95% CI $12 k, $69 k) per liver. Procuring two kidneys for two candidates from a donor lowered the marginal cost to $36 k (95% CI $22 k, $66 k) per kidney, and procuring two kidneys and a liver lowers the marginal cost to $24 k (95% CI $17 k, $45 k) per organ. Economies of scale were observed, where high OPO volume was correlated with lower costs. Despite higher cost per organ than for standard donors, kidney transplantation from nonstandard donors remained cost-effective based on contemporary US data.     

Organ procurement center allows for daytime liver transplantation with less resource utilization: May address burnout,pipeline, and safety for field of transplantation

Abdominal organ transplantation faces several challenges: burnout, limited pipeline of future surgeons, changes in liver allocation potentially impacting organ procurement travel, and travel safety. The organ procurement center (OPC) model may be one way to mitigate these issues. Liver transplants from 2009 to 2016 were reviewed. There were 755 liver transplants performed with 525 OPC and 230 in‐hospital procurements. The majority of transplants (87.4%) were started during daytime hours (5 am ‐7 pm ). Transplants with any portion occurring after‐hours were more likely to have procurements in‐hospital (P < .001). Daytime cases (n = 400) had more OPC procured livers and hepatitis C recipients and were less likely to have a donation after circulatory death donor (all P < .05). In adjusted analyses, daytime cases were independently associated with extubation in the operating room and less postoperative transfusion. There were no significant differences in short‐ or long‐term postoperative outcomes. For exported livers, 54.3% were procured by a local team, saving 137 flights (151 559 miles). The OPC resulted in optimally timed liver transplants and decreased resource utilization with no negative impact on patient outcomes. It allows for ease in exporting organs procured by local surgeons, and potentially addresses provider burnout, the transplant surgery pipeline, and surgeon travel.     

Unintended consequences of changes to lung allocation policy

Organ allocation for transplantation aims to balance the principles of justice and medical utility to optimally utilize a scarce resource. To address practical considerations, the United States is divided into 58 donor service areas (DSA), each constituting the first unit of allocation. In November 2017, in response to a lawsuit in New York, an emergency action change to lung allocation policy replaced the DSA level of allocation for donor lungs with a 250 nautical mile circle around the donor hospital. Similar policy changes are being implemented for other organs including heart and liver. Findings from a recent US Department of Health and Human Services report, supplemented with data from our institution, suggest that the emergency policy has not resulted in a change in the type of patients undergoing lung transplantation (LT) or early postoperative outcomes. However, there has been a significant decline in local LT, where donor and recipient are in the same DSA. With procurement teams having to travel greater distances, organ ischemic time has increased and median organ cost has more than doubled. We propose potential solutions for consideration at this critical juncture in the field of transplantation. Policymakers should choose equitable and sustainable access for this lifesaving discipline.     

Financial Impact of Liver Sharing and Organ Procurement Organizations' Experience With Share 35: Implications for National Broader Sharing

The Share 35 policy for organ allocation, which was adopted in June 2013, allocates livers regionally for candidates with Model for End‐Stage Liver Disease scores of 35 or greater. The authors analyzed the costs resulting from the increased movement of allografts related to this new policy. Using a sample of nine organ procurement organizations, representing 17% of the US population and 19% of the deceased donors in 2013, data were obtained on import and export costs before Share 35 implementation (June 15, 2012, to June 14, 2013) and after Share 35 implementation (June 15, 2013, to June 14, 2014). Results showed that liver import rates increased 42%, with an increased cost of 51%, while export rates increased 112%, with an increased cost of 127%. When the costs of importing and exporting allografts were combined, the total change in costs for all nine organ procurement organizations was $11 011 321 after Share 35 implementation. Extrapolating these costs nationally resulted in an increased yearly cost of $68 820 756 by population or $55 056 605 by number of organ donors. Any alternative allocation proposal needs to account for the financial implications to the transplant infrastructure.     

Geographic disparities in lung transplant rates

In November 2017, in response to a lawsuit from a New York City lung transplant candidate, an emergency change to the lung allocation policy eliminated the donation service area (DSA) as the first geographic tier of allocation. The lawsuit claimed that DSA borders are arbitrary and that allocation should be based on medical priority. We investigated whether deceased‐donor lung transplant (LT) rates differed substantially between DSAs in the United States before the policy change. We estimated LT rates per active person‐year using multilevel Poisson regression and empirical Bayes methods. We found that the median incidence rate ratio (MIRR) of transplant rates between DSAs was 2.05, meaning a candidate could be expected to double their LT rate by changing their DSA. This can be compared directly to a 1.54‐fold increase in LT rate that we found associated with an increase in lung allocation score (LAS) category from 38‐42 to 42‐50. Changing a candidate's DSA would have had a greater impact on the candidate's LT rate than changing LAS categories from 38‐42 to 42‐50. In summary, we found that the DSA of listing was a major determinant of LT rate for candidates across the country before the emergency lung allocation change.     

The Changing Financial Landscape of Renal Transplant Practice: A National Cohort Analysis

Kidney transplantation has become more resource intensive as recipient complexity has increased and average donor quality has diminished over time. A national retrospective cohort study was performed to assess the impact of kidney donor and recipient characteristics on transplant center cost (exclusive of organ acquisition) and Medicare reimbursement. Data from the national transplant registry, University HealthSystem Consortium hospital costs, and Medicare payments for deceased donor (N = 53 862) and living donor (N = 36 715) transplants from 2002 to 2013 were linked and analyzed using multivariate linear regression modeling. Deceased donor kidney transplant costs were correlated with recipient (Expected Post Transplant Survival Score, degree of allosensitization, obesity, cause of renal failure), donor (age, cause of death, donation after cardiac death, terminal creatinine), and transplant (histocompatibility matching) characteristics. Living donor costs rose sharply with higher degrees of allosensitization, and were also associated with obesity, cause of renal failure, recipient work status, and 0‐ABDR mismatching. Analysis of Medicare payments for a subsample of 24 809 transplants demonstrated minimal correlation with patient and donor characteristics. In conclusion, the complexity in the landscape of kidney transplantation increases center costs, posing financial disincentives that may reduce organ utilization and limit access for higher‐risk populations.     

Improving Organ Procurement Practices in Michigan

Travel to procure deceased donor organs is associated with risk to transplant personnel. In many instances, multiple teams are present for a given operation. We studied our statewide experience to determine how much excess travel this redundancy entails, and generated alternate models for organ recovery. We reviewed our organ procurement organization's experience with deceased donor operations between 2002 and 2008. Travel was expressed as cumulative person-miles between procurement team origin and donor hospital. A model of minimal travel was created, using thoracic and abdominal teams from the closest in-state center. A second model involved transporting donors to a dedicated procurement facility. Travel distance was recalculated using these models, and mode and cost of travel extrapolated from current practices. In 654 thoracic and 1469 abdominal donors studied, the mean travel for thoracic teams was 1066 person-miles and for abdominal teams was 550 person-miles. The mean distance traveled by thoracic and abdominal organs was 223 miles and 142 miles, respectively. Both hypothetical models showed reductions in team travel and reliance on air transport, with favorable costs and organ transport times compared to historical data. In summary, we found significant inefficiency in current practice, which may be alleviated using new paradigms for donor procurement.     

Influence of the procurement surgeon on transplanted abdominal organ outcomes: An SRTR analysis to evaluate regional organ procurement collaboration

Single‐center studies have demonstrated regional organ procurement collaboration to reduce travel redundancy and improve procurement efficiency. We studied deceased donor kidney, liver, and pancreas transplants performed in the United States between 2002 and 2014 using the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR). We compared graft failure (GF), death‐censored graft failure (DCGF), and patient death (PD) between organs procured by surgeons from the recipient's center (transplant procurement team [TPT]) versus surgeons from a different center (NTPT). Primary nonfunction (PNF) was assessed for liver and kidney and delayed graft function (DGF) for kidney using mixed‐effects logistic modeling. There were 64 906 liver (61.6% TPT), 118 152 kidney (26.1% TPT), 10 832 simultaneous pancreas kidney (SPK; 56.6% TPT), and 4378 solitary pancreas (SP; 34.0% TPT) transplants. When compared to NTPT, DCGF for organs procured by TPT was significantly less for liver (adjusted HR: 0.93; 95% CI: 0.88‐0.98) and marginally significant for kidney (0.97; 0.93‐1.00) and SPK (0.90; 0.82‐1.00), and not significant for SP (0.98; 0.86 ‐1.11). DGF for TPT kidney was significantly lower (adjusted OR 0.91; 0.87‐0.95). Albeit modest, our findings demonstrate a difference between locally procured organs and those procured by the implanting team. Elucidating the etiology of these differences will enhance regional organ procurement collaboration.     

Importance of incorporating standardized,verifiable, objective metrics of organ procurement organization performance into discussions about organ allocation

Identifying and supporting specific organ procurement organizations (OPOs) with the greatest opportunity to increase donation rates could significantly increase the number of organs available for transplant. Accomplishing this is complicated by current Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients/Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services metrics of donation rates and OPO performance that rely on eligible deaths. These data are self‐reported and unverifiable and have been shown to underestimate potential organ donors. We examine the limitations of current OPO performance/donation metrics to inform discussions related to strategies to increase donation. We propose changing to a simple, verifiable, and uniformly applied donation metric. This would allow the transplant community to (1) better understand inherent differences in donor availability based on geography and (2) identify underperforming areas that would benefit from systems improvement agreements to increase donation rates.     

Geographic disparities in donor lung supply and lung transplant waitlist outcomes: A cohort study

Despite the Final Rule mandate for equitable organ allocation in the United States, geographic disparities exist in donor lung allocation, with the majority of donor lungs being allocated locally to lower‐priority candidates. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 19 622 lung transplant candidates waitlisted between 2006 and 2015. We used multivariable adjusted competing risk survival models to examine the relationship between local lung availability and waitlist outcomes. The primary outcome was a composite of death and removal from the waitlist for clinical deterioration. Waitlist candidates in the lowest quartile of local lung availability had an 84% increased risk of death or removal compared with candidates in the highest (subdistribution hazard ratio [SHR]: 1.84, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.51‐2.24, P < .001). The transplantation rate was 57% lower in the lowest quartile compared with the highest (SHR: 0.43, 95% CI: 0.39‐0.47). The adjusted death or removal rate decreased by 11% with a 50% increase in local lung availability (SHR: 0.89, 95% CI: 0.85‐0.93, P < .001) and the adjusted transplantation rate increased by 19% (SHR: 1.19, 95% CI: 1.17‐1.22, P < .001). There are geographically disparate waitlist outcomes in the current lung allocation system. Candidates listed in areas of low local lung availability have worse waitlist outcomes.     

Does Lung Donation by Heart Donors Have an Impact on Survival in Heart Transplant Recipients?

Lung procurement is increasing during multiorgan recovery and substantially alters the explant process. This study evaluated whether lung donation by a heart donor affects survival in heart transplant recipients. Retrospective analysis of United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) adult heart transplantation data from 1998 to 2012 was performed. Lung donors (LDs) were defined as those having at least one lung procured and transplanted. Non‐LDs had neither lung transplanted. Heart transplant recipients who had previous transplants, who had heterotopic transplants, who were waitlisted for other organs or who were temporarily delisted were excluded from the analysis. Kaplan–Meier survival analysis and Cox proportional hazards regression were performed. Of 23 590 heart transplant recipients meeting criteria during the study period, 8638 (36.6%) transplants were from LDs. Donors in the LD group had less history of cigarette use (15.5% vs. 29.5%, p < 0.001). On univariate analysis, LDs were associated with improved patient survival (p < 0.001). On multivariate analysis, LDs were not significantly associated with patient survival (adjusted hazard ratio 0.98, 95% confidence interval 0.94–1.03). Analysis of the UNOS registry suggested that donor pulmonary status and lung procurement had no detrimental effect on survival in heart transplant recipients, supporting the present practice of using donor lungs whenever possible.     

Changing demographics of heart donors: The impact of donor drug intoxication on posttransplant survival

Recent reports have shown an increase in the number of organ donors from drug intoxication. The impact of donor drug use on survival after cardiac transplant remains unclear. The aim of our study was to illustrate changes in donor death mechanisms and assess the impact on posttransplant survival. We queried United Network of Organ Sharing thoracic transplant and deceased donor databases to identify patients undergoing heart transplantation between 2005 and 2015. We evaluated annual trends in donor death mechanisms. Recipients were propensity matched (drug‐intoxicated—non‐drug‐intoxicated = 1:2) and posttransplant survival was compared using Kaplan‐Meier curves. In total, 19 384 donor hearts were used for transplant during the period (donor age 31.6 ± 11.8 years, 72% male). Use of drug‐intoxicated donors increased from 2% (2005) to 13% (2015) and decreased from blunt injury (40%‐30%) and intracranial hemorrhage (29%‐25%). After propensity matching, posttransplant survival of drug‐intoxicated donor hearts was 90%, 82%, and 76% at 1, 3, and 5 years, which was similar to non‐drug‐intoxicated. Heart transplants using drug‐intoxicated donors have significantly increased; however, they have not adversely affected posttransplant survival. Hearts from drug‐intoxicated donors should be carefully evaluated and considered for transplant.     

Patterns of geographic variability in mortality and eligible deaths between organ procurement organizations

Eligible deaths are currently used as the denominator of the donor conversion ratio to mitigate the effect of varying mortality patterns in the populations served by different organ procurement organizations (OPOs). Eligible death is an OPO‐reported metric rather than a product of formal epidemiological analysis, however, and may be confounded with OPO performance. Using Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data, patterns of mortality and eligible deaths within each OPO were analyzed with the use of formal geostatistical analysis to determine whether eligible deaths truly reflect the geographic patterns they are intended to mitigate. There was a 2.1‐fold difference in mortality between the OPOs with the highest and lowest rates, with significant positive spatial autocorrelation evident in mortality rates (Moran I = .110; P < .001), meaning geographically proximate OPOs tended to have similar mortality rates. The eligible death ratio demonstrated greater variability, with a 4.5‐fold difference between the OPOs with the highest and lowest rates. Contrary to the pattern of mortality rates, the geographic distribution of eligible deaths among OPOs was random (Moran I = ?.002; P = .410). This finding suggests geographic patterns do not play a significant role in eligible deaths, thus questioning its continuing use in OPO performance comparisons.     

The allocation of pancreas allografts on donor age and duration of intensive care unit stay: the experience of the North Italy Transplant program

Starting in 2011, the North Italy Transplant program (NITp) has based on the allocation of pancreas allografts on donor age and duration of intensive care unit (ICU) stay, but not on donor weight or BMI. We analyzed the detailed allocation protocols of all NITp pancreas donors (2011–2012; n = 433). Outcome measures included donor characteristics and pancreas loss reasons during the allocation process. Twenty‐three percent of the 433 pancreases offered for allocation were transplanted. Younger age, shorter ICU stay, traumatic brain death, and higher eGFR were predictors of pancreas transplant, either as vascularized organ or as islets. Among pancreas allografts offered to vascularized organ programs, 35% were indeed transplanted, and younger donor age was the only predictor of transplant. The most common reasons for pancreas withdrawal from the allocation process were donor‐related factors. Among pancreas offered to islet programs, 48% were processed, but only 14.2% were indeed transplanted, with unsuccessful isolation being the most common reason for pancreas loss. Younger donor age and higher BMI were predictors of islet allograft transplant. The current allocation strategy has allowed an equal distribution of pancreas allografts between programs for either vascularized organ or islet transplant. The high rate of discarded organs remained an unresolved issue.     

A change of heart: Preliminary results of the US 2018 adult heart allocation revision

In 2018, the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) modified adult heart allocation to better stratify candidates and provide broader access to the most medically urgent candidates. We analyzed OPTN data that included waiting list and transplant characteristics, geographical distribution, and early outcomes 1 year before (pre: October 18, 2017‐October 17, 2018) and following (post: October 18, 2018‐October 17, 2019) implementation. The number of adult heart transplants increased from 2954 pre‐ to 3032 postimplementation. Seventy‐eight percent of transplants in the post era were for the most medically urgent (statuses 1‐3) compared to 68% for status 1A in the pre era. The median distance between the donor hospital and transplant center increased from 83 to 216 nautical miles, with an increase in total ischemic time from 3 to 3.4 hours (all P < .001). Waiting list mortality was not different across eras (14.8 vs 14.9 deaths per 100 patient‐years pre vs post respectively). Posttransplant patient survival was not different, 93.6% pre and 92.8% post. There is early evidence that the heart allocation policy has enhanced stratification of candidates by their medical urgency and broader distribution for the most medically urgent candidates with minimal impact on overall waiting list mortality and posttransplant outcomes.     

Current landscape of kidney allocation: Organ procurement organization perspectives

Organ procurement organizations (OPOs) play a central role in the recovery, preservation, and distribution of deceased donor kidneys for transplantation in the United States. We conducted a national survey to gather information on OPO practices and perceived barriers to efficient organ placement in the face of the new circle-based allocation and asked for suggestions to overcome them. Of the 57 OPOs, 44 responded (77%). The majority of OPOs (61%) reported barriers to obtaining a kidney biopsy, including lack of an available pathologist. Most OPOs (55%) indicated barriers to pumping owing to a lack of available staff and transportation. Respondents agreed or strongly agreed that the new allocation system has worsened transportation challenges (85%), increased provisional acceptances of kidneys (66%), increased communication challenges with transplant centers (68%), and worsened the efficiency of organ allocation (83%). OPO-suggested solutions include making transplant centers more accountable for inefficient selection practices, developing reliable transportation options, and removing the requirement for national sharing. These findings underscore the need to examine closely the trade-offs of the new allocation system with respect to costs, organ ischemia, and discard. These findings may help inform practice and policy for overcoming transportation barriers and improving the efficiency of organ placement.     

The First 2 Years of Activity of a Specialized Organ Procurement Center: Report of an Innovative Approach to Improve Organ Donation

The number of patients requiring organ transplants continues to outgrow the number of organs donated each year. In an attempt to improve the organ donation process and increase the number of organs available, we created a specialized multidisciplinary team within a specialized organ procurement center (OPC) with dedicated intensive care unit (ICU) beds and operating rooms. The OPC was staffed with ICU nurses, operating room nurses, organ donor management ICU physicians, and multidisciplinary staff. All organ donors within a designated geographic area were transferred to and managed within the OPC. During the first 2 years of operation, 126 patients were referred to the OPC. The OPC was in use for a total of 3527 h and involved 253 health workers. We retrieved 173 kidneys, 95 lungs, 68 livers, 37 hearts, and 13 pancreases for a total of 386 organs offered for transplantation. This translates to a total of 124.6 persons transplanted per million population, which compares most favorably to recently published numbers in developed countries. The OPC clearly demonstrates potential to increase the number of deceased donor organs available for transplant. Further studies are warranted to better understand the exact influence of the different components of the OPC on organ procurement.     

Kidney allograft offers: Predictors of turndown and the impact of late organ acceptance on allograft survival

There is growing interest in understanding patterns of organ acceptance and reducing discard. Little is known about how donor factors, timing of procurement, and geographic location affect organ offer decisions. We performed a retrospective cohort study of 47 563 deceased donor kidney match‐runs from 2007 to 2013. Several characteristics unrelated to allograft quality were independently associated with later acceptance in the match‐run: Public Health Service increased‐risk donor status (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.49, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.29‐2.69), holiday or weekend procurement (aOR 1.11, 95% CI 1.07‐1.16), shorter donor stature (aOR 1.53 for <150 cm vs reference >180 cm, 95% CI 1.28‐1.94), and procurement in an area with higher intensity of market competition (aOR 1.71, 95% CI 1.62‐1.78) and with the longest waiting times (aOR 1.41, 95% CI 1.34‐1.49). Later acceptance in the match‐run was associated with delayed graft function but not all‐cause allograft failure (adjusted hazard ratio 1.01, 95% CI 0.96‐1.07). Study limitations include a lack of match‐run data for discarded organs and the possibility of sequence inaccuracies for some nonlocal matches. Interventions are needed to reduce turndowns of viable organs, especially when decisions are driven by infectious risk, weekend or holiday procurement, geography, or other donor characteristics unrelated to allograft quality.     

Insights into the labeling effect of Kidney Donor Performance Index reporting: The Australian experience

In 2016, Australia began reporting the Kidney Donor Performance Index (KDPI) with all deceased donor kidney transplant offers despite this not being used in organ allocation rules, offering a unique opportunity to explore the “labeling effect” of KDPI reporting. We reviewed all kidneys retrieved for transplant in Australia from 2015 to 2018 and analyzed the association of KDPI reporting with organ nonutilization, number of offer declines, and donor/recipient age and longevity matching. Analyses were stratified by organ failure risk: higher risk (KDPI > 80%), standard risk (KDPI 20% to 79%), and lower risk (KDPI 0% to 20%). There was no significant difference in organ nonutilization post KDPI reporting either overall or for higher‐risk kidneys. KDPI reporting was associated with an increase in offer declines for both higher‐risk (incidence risk ratio 1.45, P = .007) and standard‐risk (incidence risk ratio 1.22, P = .021) kidneys but not for lower‐risk organs. There was a significant increase in recipient age and expected posttransplant survival score for higher‐risk kidneys but no differences among other groups. We conclude that although KDPI reporting in Australia has been associated with an increased number of offer declines for higher‐risk kidneys, this has not resulted in increased nonutilization and may have contributed to more appropriate use of these organs.     

Long-term kidney transplant graft survival—Making progress when most needed

Current short-term kidney post–transplant survival rates are excellent, but longer-term outcomes have historically been unchanged. This study used data from the national Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) and evaluated 1-year and 5-year graft survival and half-lives for kidney transplant recipients in the US. All adult (≥18 years) solitary kidney transplants (n = 331,216) from 1995 to 2017 were included in the analysis. Mean age was 49.4 years (SD +/-13.7), 60% male, and 25% Black. The overall (deceased and living donor) adjusted hazard of graft failure steadily decreased from 0.89 (95%CI: 0.88, 0.91) in era 2000–2004 to 0.46 (95%CI: 0.45, 0.47) for era 2014–2017 (1995–1999 as reference). Improvements in adjusted hazards of graft failure were more favorable for Blacks, diabetics and older recipients. Median survival for deceased donor transplants increased from 8.2 years in era 1995–1999 to an estimated 11.7 years in the most recent era. Living kidney donor transplant median survival increased from 12.1 years in 1995–1999 to an estimated 19.2 years for transplants in 2014–2017. In conclusion, these data show continuous improvement in long-term outcomes with more notable improvement among higher-risk subgroups, suggesting a narrowing in the gap for those disadvantaged after transplantation.