Survival and renal function after liver transplantation alone in patients meeting the new United Network for Organ Sharing simultaneous liver-kidney criteria

In 2017, United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) implemented a simultaneous liver-kidney transplant (SLK) allocation policy. Our institution uses a more restrictive criteria for SLK; thus, we have a group of patients that would have qualified for SLK under the new allocation policy but received liver transplantation alone (LTA). We compared survival and post-operative renal function in patients that received LTA stratified by whether they met the new UNOS SLK criteria. There was no difference in graft and patient survival. The majority (95%) of LTA patients meeting the UNOS SLK criteria did not need dialysis at 1 year, with a mean eGFR increase from 23 mL/min preoperatively to 48 mL/min at 1 year. Of those with eGFR ≤ 20 mL/min at 1 month after surgery, the majority did regain adequate renal function. The implementation of the UNOS SLK allocation policy was appropriate in the previously unregulated area. This policy provides an excellent framework for those that may benefit from SLK. Our data suggest that a more restrictive policy may be possible in order to promote the best use of donated organs. The current safety net is appropriately positioned to capture patients in need of subsequent kidney transplant.     

Perspectives on donor lung allocation from both sides of the Atlantic: The United States

Donor lung allocation in the United States focuses on decreasing waitlist mortality and improving recipient outcomes. The implementation of allocation policy to match deceased donor lungs to waitlisted patients occurs through a unique partnership between government and private organizations, namely the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network under the Department of Health and Human Services and the United Network for Organ Sharing. In 2005, the donor lung allocation algorithm shifted toward the prioritization of medical urgency of waitlisted patients instead of time accrued on the waitlist. This led to the Lung Allocation Score, which weighs over a dozen clinical variables to predict a 1-year estimate of survival benefit, and is used to prioritize waitlisted patients. In 2017, the use of local allocation boundaries was eliminated in favor of a 250 nautical mile radius from the donor hospital as the first unit of distance used in allocation. The next upcoming iteration of donor allocation policy is expected to use a continuous distribution algorithm where all geographic boundaries are eliminated. There are additional opportunities to improve donor lung allocation, such as for patients with high antibody titers with access to a limited number of donors.     

A long‐term experience with expansion of Milan criteria for liver transplant recipients

The Milan criteria (MC) have historically determined eligibility for transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) Region 4 expanded the criteria for transplantation in HCC to include a single tumor ≤6 cm or up to 3 tumors with the largest diameter ≤5 cm and total additive diameter ≤9 cm (R4C). The aim of this study was to report the 10‐year outcomes of this expanded criteria compared to MC. Transplants performed for HCC in Region 4 between October 2007 and December 2016 were reviewed using the UNOS database. Recipients were categorized based on imaging findings at initial evaluation. A total of 2068 patients were included in the study. There was no significant difference in 10‐year patient survival between the groups (53% MC vs 48% R4C, P = .23). There was also no significant difference in recurrence‐free survival (54% MC vs 47% R4C, P = .15) or allograft survival (53% MC vs 48% R4C, P = .16). Finally, there was no significant difference in outcomes between the MC and R4C groups when stratifying patients by locoregional therapy. This study demonstrates promising data that the criteria for liver transplantation in HCC can be safely expanded to the R4C without compromising outcomes.     

Misdiagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma in patients receiving no local‐regional therapy prior to liver transplant: An analysis of the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network explant pathology form

Patients with T1 hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) are not eligible for Model for End Stage Liver Disease (MELD) exception for liver transplant (LT) in part due to a high rate of misdiagnosis (no HCC on explant). The likelihood of misdiagnosis for T2 HCC and factors associated with misdiagnosis are unknown. We analyzed the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network database including 5664 adults who underwent LT from 2012 to 2015 with MELD exception for T2 HCC, and searched for no evidence of HCC in the explant pathology file. We focused on those (n = 324) receiving no local‐regional therapy (LRT) to evaluate the probability of no HCC found in explant. Median waiting time was short at 1.7 months, and 35 (11%) had no HCC on explant. On multivariable logistic regression, factors associated with no HCC on explant were age <50 (OR: 17.3, P < .001), non‐HCV (OR: 5.4, P = .001), and alpha‐fetoprotein <10 (OR: 2.9, P = .04). Tumor size and number were not different between groups. The proportion of misdiagnosis did not change significantly after implementation of Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI‐RADS) for HCC diagnosis. Conclusion: The rate of misdiagnosis was 11% among T2 HCC patients who underwent LT without receiving LRT prior to LT and did not change significantly after implementation of LI‐RADS. More efforts are needed to eliminate unnecessary LT for patients without HCC.     

The adapted Heart Donor Score

The Heart Donor Score (HDS) predicts donor organ discard for medical reasons and survival after heart transplantation (HTX) in the Eurotransplant allocation system. Our aim was to adapt the HDS for application in the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) registry. To adjust for differences between the Eurotransplant and UNOS registries, the “adapted HDS” was created (aHDS) by exclusion of the covariates “valve function,” “left-ventricular hypertrophy,” and exclusion of “drug abuse” from the variable “compromised history.” Two datasets were analyzed to evaluate associations of the aHDS with donor organ discard (n = 70 948) and survival (n = 19 279). The aHDS was significantly associated with donor organ discard [odds ratio 2.72, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.68–2.76, P < 0.001; c-statistic: 0.937). The score performed comparably in donors <60 and ≥60 years of age. The aHDS was a significant predictor of survival as evaluated by univariate Cox proportional hazards analysis (hazard ratio 1.04, 95% CI 1.01–1.07, P = 0.023), although the association lost significance in a multivariable model. The aHDS predicts donor organ discard. Negative effects of most aHDS components on survival are likely eliminated by highly accurate donor selection processes.     

Examining the transplant case composition of early-career transplant surgeons

Fellowship training established by the American Society of Transplant Surgeons and certified by the Transplant Accreditation and Certification Council provides trainees with broad exposure and practice readiness for the core aspects of abdominal transplantation. However, the operative case mix of a new transplant surgeon early in practice is unknown. This study examined the volume and composition of the transplant case mix of early-career transplant surgeons to better inform residents interested in transplantation about potential career opportunities following fellowship. cas 209 early-career transplant surgeons were identified from the UNOS database containing encrypted surgeon-specific identifiers and were included in this study. At 5 years into practice, there were 85 (40.7%) kidney-predominant, 38 (18.2%) liver-predominant, and 86 (41.1%) multiorgan transplant surgeons. Comparing surgeon subgroups, multiorgan surgeons performed more transplants in year 5 of practice than both liver-predominant and kidney-predominant surgeons (both p < .05). This is the first study to describe the transplant case composition of the early-career transplant surgeons. This data can be used to inform aspiring transplant surgeons about potential career opportunities and to assist fellowship programs in guiding and mentoring fellows.     

Life underneath the VCA umbrella: Perspectives from the US Uterus Transplant Consortium

The parallel emergence of uterus transplantation (UTx) and other transplantation innovations including face and hand transplantation led to the categorization of the uterus as a vascular composite allograft (VCA). With >60 transplants and >20 births worldwide, UTx is transitioning rapidly from a research endeavor to an effective treatment option for women with uterine factor infertility. While it originally made sense to group the innovations under one umbrella, it is time to revisit the designation of UTx as a VCA. We describe how UTx needs unique policy, procedural codes, insurance contracts, and educational initiatives. We contend that separating UTx from VCAs may become necessary in the future to avoid hindering the growth and regulation of this field.     

Now is the time for the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network to change regulatory policy to effectively increase transplantation in the United States; Carpe Diem

With the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services proposing to remove outcome measures from the transplant centers’ renewal for Conditions of Participation an exciting opportunity surfaces for the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network to make an equally bold change and allow for increased transplantation options for patients in the United States.     

Survival Outcomes Following Pediatric Liver Transplantation (Pedi‐SOFT) Score: A Novel Predictive Index

A prognostic index to predict survival after liver transplantation could address several clinical needs. Here, we devised a scoring system that predicts recipient survival after pediatric liver transplantation. We used univariate and multivariate analysis on 4565 pediatric liver transplant recipients data and identified independent recipient and donor risk factors for posttransplant mortality at 3 months. Multiple imputation was used to account for missing variables. We identified five factors as significant predictors of recipient mortality after pediatric liver transplantation: two previous transplants (OR 5.88, CI 2.88–12.01), one previous transplant (OR 2.54, CI 1.75–3.68), life support (OR 3.68, CI 2.39–5.67), renal insufficiency (OR 2.66, CI 1.84–3.84), recipient weight under 6 kilograms (OR 1.67, CI 1.12–2.36) and cadaveric technical variant allograft (OR 1.38, CI 1.03–1.83). The Survival Outcomes Following Pediatric Liver Transplant score assigns weighted risk points to each of these factors in a scoring system to predict 3‐month recipient survival after liver transplantation with a C‐statistic of 0.74. Although quite accurate when compared with other posttransplant survival models, we would not advocate individual clinical application of the index.     

ABO‐Nonidentical Liver Transplantation in the United States

Under the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) policy, deceased donor livers may be offered to ABO‐nonidentical candidates at each given Model for End‐Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score and to blood type B candidates at MELD ≥30. To evaluate ABO‐nonidentical liver transplantation (LT) in the United States, we examined all adult LT non–status 1 candidates, recipients and deceased liver donors from 2013 to 2015. There were 34 920 LT candidates (47% type O, 38% type A, 12% type B, 3% type AB) and 10 479 deceased liver donors (47% type O, 38% type A, 12% type B, 3% type AB). ABO‐nonidentical LT occurred in 2%, 3%, 20% and 36% of types O, A, B and AB recipients, respectively, which led to a net liver loss of 6% for type O and 2% for type A recipients but a net liver gain of 14% for type B and 55% for type AB recipients. The LT MELD scores of ABO‐identical versus ‐nonidentical recipients were 29 versus 34 for type O, 29 versus 19 for type A, 25 versus 38 for type B, and 22 versus 28 for type AB (p < 0.01). ABO‐nonidentical LT increased liver supply for candidates with blood types B and AB but decreased supply for type O and A candidates. We urge refinement of UNOS policy surrounding ABO‐nonidentical LT.     

Outcome of induction immunosuppression for liver transplantation comparing anti‐thymocyte globulin,daclizumab, and corticosteroid

In addition to standard corticosteroid induction, anti‐thymocyte globulin (ATG) or daclizumab as induction immunosuppression has been reported for liver transplantation. However, the effects and long‐term outcomes of antibody induction therapy are not well known, especially for hepatitis C (HCV). The United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) database was utilized to analyze 16 898 adult primary liver transplant patients who received ATG alone (n = 452), ATG and steroids (ATG + S) (n = 1758), daclizumab alone (n = 683), or steroid alone (n = 14 005), listed as induction immunosuppression. Graft and patient survival, and donor and recipient factors for survival were analyzed for HCV and all liver diseases. For patients with HCV, ATG + S had significantly inferior graft survival compared with daclizumab (P = 0.01) and steroids (P = 0.03). The Cox proportional hazards model also showed that ATG + S was a marginal risk factor for graft failure (P = 0.05). On the other hand, for patients with all the liver diseases, graft and patient survival were not significantly different between induction regimens. ATG induction appeared to be preferentially used in patients with renal dysfunction, with improvement in renal function after liver transplantation. Thus, ATG induction can be used for patients with renal dysfunction in non‐HCV diseases. Daclizumab induction achieved satisfactory short‐term and long‐term outcomes of liver transplantation in all the liver diseases including HCV disease.     

Risk factors for development of new-onset diabetes mellitus after transplant in adult lung transplant recipients

The objectives of this study are to examine the incidence of new-onset diabetes mellitus after transplant (NODAT) and to identify its risk factors in adult lung transplant recipients using the Organ Procurement and Transplant Network/United Network of Organ Sharing database. Between July 2004 and December 2007, a total of 3540 adults (≥18 yr old) received their first single- or double-lung transplant alone and had at least one follow-up report of post-transplant diabetic status. Among these, 2991 recipients were identified as not having diabetes mellitus (DM) pre-transplant. Risk factors for NODAT were examined. DM was newly reported in 33.4% of the 2991 recipients over the median follow-up time of 670 d. Significant independent risk factors for the development of NODAT included male gender (HR = 1.15), recipient age ≥50 (1.46), African American (1.39), higher body mass index (1.51 for ≥30 vs. 18-25), cystic fibrosis (3.30), and tacrolimus use at discharge (1.67). NODAT occurred in a third of adult lung transplant recipients during the median follow-up period. Some of the risk factors for NODAT after lung transplant are similar to those reported in other solid-organ transplants. Cystic fibrosis is a strong risk factor for development of NODAT after lung transplant.     

Predictors of low risk for dropout from the liver transplant waiting list for hepatocellular carcinoma in long wait time regions: Implications for organ allocation

All patients with hepatocellular carcinoma meeting United Network for Organ Sharing T2 criteria currently receive the same listing priority for liver transplant (LT). A previous study from our center identified a subgroup with a very low risk of waitlist dropout who may not derive immediate LT benefit. To evaluate this issue at a national level, we analyzed within the United Network for Organ Sharing database 2052 patients with T2 hepatocellular carcinoma receiving priority listing from 2011 to 2014 in long wait time regions 1, 5, and 9. Probabilities of waitlist dropout were 18.3% at 1 year and 27% at 2 years. In multivariate analysis, factors associated with a lower risk of waitlist dropout included Model for End‐Stage Liver Disease‐Na < 15, Child's class A, single 2‐ to 3‐cm lesion, and α‐fetoprotein ≤20 ng/mL. The subgroup of 245 (11.9%) patients meeting these 4 criteria at LT listing had a 1‐year probability of dropout of 5.5% vs 20% for all others (P < .001). On explant, the low dropout risk group was more likely to have complete tumor necrosis (35.5% vs 24.9%, P = .01) and less likely to exceed Milan criteria (9.9% vs 17.7%, P = .03). We identified a subgroup with a low risk of waitlist dropout who should not receive the same LT listing priority.