Search

There is a need to reconsider the acceptance of organs from donors considered suboptimal, in the absence of data. Toxoplasma antibody-positive donors (TPD) constitute one such group. The objective of our study was to compare graft survival in deceased donor renal transplant (Tx) recipients, stratified by Toxoplasma IgG status, using the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) database. A log-linear event history regression model for graft failure categorized by Toxoplasma IgG status, adjusting for confounders was applied to first kidney-only Tx recipients from 2018 to 2022. Of the 51,422 Tx, 4,317 (8.4%) were from TPD. Acute rejection and graft failure (5% each) were similar between groups. Crude graft failure was 7.3 failures per 100 person-years for TPD recipients compared to 6.5 failures per 100 person-years for the Toxoplasma-negative group (p 0.008). The crude failure rate ratio was 1.14 with an adjusted hazard rate ratio of 1.04 (95% CI: 0.94, 1.15, p 0.39). In renal Tx recipients, TPD graft recipients have comparable survival to Tx from Toxoplasma-negative recipients. While caution and close monitoring of recipients post-Tx for surveillance of disseminated toxoplasmosis are still warranted, our study suggests that patients can be successfully managed using TPD organs.

Kidney transplantation is the most successful kidney replacement therapy available, resulting in improved recipient survival and societal cost savings. Yet, nearly 70 years after the first successful kidney transplant, there are still numerous barriers and untapped opportunities that constrain the access to transplant. The literature describing these barriers is extensive, but the practices and processes to solve them are less clear. Solutions must be multidisciplinary and be the product of strong partnerships among patients, their networks, health care providers, and transplant programs. Transparency in the referral, evaluation, and listing process as well as organ selection are paramount to build such partnerships. Providing early culturally congruent and patient-centered education as well as maximizing the use of local resources to facilitate the transplant work up should be prioritized. Every opportunity to facilitate pre-emptive kidney transplantation and living donation must be taken. Promoting the use of telemedicine and kidney paired donation as standards of care can positively impact the work up completion and maximize the chances of a living donor kidney transplant.

INTRODUCTION: The impact of donation after circulatory death (DCD) heart procurement techniques on the utilization and outcomes of concurrently procured DCD livers and kidneys remains unclear. METHODS: Using the United Network for Organ Sharing database, we identified 246 DCD donors whose heart was procured using direct procurement and ex-situ machine perfusion and 128 DCD donors whose heart was procured using in-situ thoracoabdominal normothermic regional perfusion (12/2019-03/2022). We evaluated the transplantation rate of concurrently procured DCD livers and kidneys (defined as the number of organs transplanted/total number of organs available for procurement) and their post-transplant outcomes. RESULTS: The transplantation rate of concurrently procured DCD livers was higher with in-situ perfusion compared to direct procurement (67.1% vs 56.5%, p = 0.045). After excluding pediatric, multiorgan, and repeat transplant recipients, there was no difference in 6-month liver graft failure rate (direct procurement 0.9% vs in-situ perfusion 0%, p > 0.99). Recipients of kidneys procured with in-situ perfusion had less delayed graft function (11.3% vs 41.5%, p < 0.0001) shorter length of stay, and lower serum creatinine at discharge (both p < 0.05). Six-month recipient survival in the direct procurement and in-situ perfusion group were similar after DCD liver and kidney transplantation (p = 0.24 and 0.79 respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Compared to direct procurement, DCD heart procurement with in-situ thoracoabdominal normothermic regional perfusion was associated with increased utilization of DCD livers and a lower incidence of delayed graft function in concurrently procured DCD kidneys. Broader implementation of DCD heart transplantation must maximize the transplant potential of concurrently procured abdominal organs and ensure their successful outcomes.

BackgroundPediatric heart transplant candidates on the waitlist have the highest mortality rate among all solid organ transplants. A risk score incorporating a candidate's individual risk factors may better predict mortality on the waitlist and optimize organ allocation to the sickest of those awaiting transplant.MethodsUsing the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) database, we evaluated a total of 5542 patients aged 0-18 years old on the waitlist for a single, first time, heart transplant from January 2010 to June 2019. We performed a univariate analysis on two-thirds (N = 3705) of these patients to derive the factors most associated with waitlist mortality or delisting secondary to deterioration within 1 year. Those with a p <0.2 underwent a multivariate analysis and the resulting factors were used to build a prediction model using the Fine-Grey model analysis. This predictive scoring model was then validated on the remaining one-third of the patients (N = 1852).ResultsThe Pediatric Risk to OHT (PRO) scoring model utilizes the following unique patient variables: blood type, diagnosis of congenital heart disease, weight, presence of ventilator support, presence of inotropic support, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ecmo) status, creatinine level, and region. A higher score indicates an increased risk of mortality. The PRO score had a predictive strength of 0.762 as measured by area under the ROC curve at 1 year.ConclusionThe PRO score is an improved predictive model with the potential to better assess mortality for patients awaiting heart transplant.

Since the Final Rule regarding transplantation was published in 1999, organ distribution policies have been implemented to reduce geographic disparity. While a recent change in liver allocation, termed acuity circles, eliminated the donor service area as a unit of distribution to decrease the geographic disparity of waitlisted patients to liver transplantation, recently published results highlight the complexity of addressing geographic disparity. From geographic variation in donor supply, as well as liver disease burden and differing model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) scores of candidates and MELD scores necessary to receive liver transplantation, to the urban-rural disparity in specialty care access, and to neighborhood deprivation (community measure of socioeconomic status) in liver transplant access, addressing disparities of access will require a multipronged approach at the patient, transplant center, and national level. Herein, we review the current knowledge of these disparities-from variation in larger (regional) to smaller (census tract or zip code) levels to the common etiologies of liver disease, which are particularly affected by these geographic boundaries. The geographic disparity in liver transplant access must balance the limited organ supply with the growing demand. We must identify patient-level factors that contribute to their geographic disparity and incorporate these findings at the transplant center level to develop targeted interventions. We must simultaneously work at the national level to standardize and share patient data (including socioeconomic status and geographic social deprivation indices) to better understand the factors that contribute to the geographic disparity. The complex interplay between organ distribution policy, referral patterns, and variable waitlisting practices with the proportion of high MELD patients and differences in potential donor supply must all be considered to create a national policy strategy to address

INTRODUCTION: Latinos are underrepresented in brain autopsy research on Alzheimers disease and related dementias (ADRD). The studys purpose is to identify Latinos attitudes about brain donation (BD) to inform methods by which researchers can increase autopsy consent. METHODS: Forty Latinos (mean age: 59.4 years) completed a semi-structured interview and were presented with educational information about BD. Participants completed a questionnaire assessing their understanding of BD and willingness to donate their brain for research. RESULTS: Among participants, there was near unanimous support for BD to study ADRD after hearing educational information. However, prior to the information presented, participants reported a lack of knowledge about BD and demonstrated a possibility that misunderstandings about BD may affect participation. DISCUSSION: While nearly all study participants agree that donating is beneficial for research and for future generations, the lack of BD information must be addressed to help support positive attitudes and willingness for participation.

This chapter updates the COVID-19 chapter from the 2020 Annual Data Report with trends through February 12, 2022, and introduces trends in COVID-19-specific cause of death on the waiting list and posttransplant. Transplant rates remain at or above prepandemic levels for all organs, indicating a sustained transplantation system recovery following the initial 3-month disruption due to the onset of the pandemic. Posttransplant mortality and graft failure remain a concern in all organs, with rates surging corresponding to waves of the pandemic. Waitlist mortality due to COVID-19 is also a concern, particularly among kidney candidates. While the recovery of the transplantation system has been sustained in the second year of the pandemic, ongoing efforts should focus on reducing posttransplant and waitlist mortality due to COVID-19, and graft failure.

Purpose of the reviewTo summarize the international experience with heart-liver (joint) donation after circulatory death (DCD) procurements and to explore the technical challenges in joint abdominal and thoracic DCD procurement.Recent findingsFollowing completion of the Donors After Circulatory Death Heart Trial in the US, combined thoracic and abdominal DCD is poised to become the standard of care, expanding access to life-saving heart and lung allografts. DCD heart procurement relies on collection of donor blood for priming of the normothermic perfusion pump, which delays cooling of abdominal organs and increases risk of ischemic injury. We review the effect of donor ischemia time on abdominal organs, with several proposed technical solutions to optimize transplant outcomes for all organs.SummaryThe strategies reviewed in this manuscript may inform clinical decision-making, preoperative coordination between thoracic and abdominal procurement teams, and surgical technique for joint DCD procurements. Several approaches to organ procurement organization (OPO) and national policy, as well as future areas of focus for research are proposed.

Introduction:The process of organ and tissue donation is defined by actions to transform a Potential Donor (PD) into an effective donor and begins with the diagnosis of brain death. Objective:to analyze the clinical and sociodemographic profile of potential organ donors, as well as the factors that influence organ donation. Methods:This is a quantitative, cross-sectional, retrospective, and analytical research carried out in a region of Northeast Brazil by collecting data from 455 medical records of patients with brain death, who were diagnosed using a structured form. Subsequently, descriptive analyzes were carried out and for the associations between the independent and dependent variables, the Pearson's chi-square test was used. Results:The age groups with the highest incidence were between 21 to 40 years old and 41 to 60 years old, with a 33.8 % each, with a predominance of males (64.1%). Regarding the cause of death, traumatic brain injury was the most common with a 36.5% of the sample. From the 83.3% of the family members that were interviewed, 53.5% of them authorized the donation. Male potential donors constituted the 59.01% of the authorized donations (positive interviews). There was no relationship between the interview results and the age group of the PD.When correlating the results of family interviews and the cause of death, 40.63% of them were caused by traumatic brain injury and, out of this total, 63.63% had the donation authorized. Conclusion:The most effective donors were young and male whose cause of brain death was traumatic brain injury and whose families allowed the donation, Introdução:O processo de doação de órgãos e tecidos é definido por ações a fim de transformar um Potencial Doador (PD) em doador efetivo e inicia-se com o diagnóstico de morte encefálica.Objetivo:analisar o perfil clínico e sociodemográfico dos potenciais doadores de órgãos, como também os fatores que influenciam na doação de órgãos. Métodos:Trata-se de uma pesquisa quantitativa, transversal, retrospectiva e analítica realizada através da coleta de dados de 455 prontuários de pacientes com diagnóstico de Morte Encefálica, de uma Região do Nordeste brasileiro,utilizando formulário estruturado. Posteriormente realizaram-se análises descritivas e nas associações entre as variáveis independentes e dependente, utilizou-se o teste qui-quadrado de Pearson Resultados:As faixas etárias de maior incidência foram entre 21 a 40 anos e 41 a 60 anos, com 33,8% cada, prevalecendo o sexo masculino (64,1%). Em relação à causa da morte, predominou o Trauma Cranioencefálico com 36,5%. Foram entrevistados 83,3% dos familiares e desses, 53,5% autorizaram a doação. Quanto à relação das respostas das entrevistas com os familiares e o sexo dos PD o sexo masculino se destacou com 59,01% das entrevistas positivas, quanto a entrevista e faixa etária, não foram encontradas diferenças significativas. Correlacionando o resultado das entrevistas familiares e a causa da morte, 40,63% destas tinham como causa o trauma cranioencefálico, e desse total, 63,63% tiveram a doação autorizada. Conclusão: A maioria dos doadores efetivos foram jovens e do sexo masculino, com prevalência do trauma craneoencefálico como causa da morte encefálica e da aceitação familiar para a doação, Caracterización del proceso de donación de órganos enuna región de BrasilIntroducción: El proceso de donación de órganos y tejidos se define por las acciones encaminadas a transformar a una persona donante potencial (DP) en donante efectiva. Este proceso comienza con el diagnóstico de muerte encefálica. Objetivo: analizar el perfil clínico y sociodemográfico de potenciales donantes de órganos, así como los factores que influyen en la donación de órganos. Métodos:Se trata de una investigación cuantitativa, transversal, retrospectiva y analítica realizada a partir de la recopilación de datos de 455 prontuarios de pacientes con diagnóstico de muerte encefálica, en una región del Nordeste de Brasil, utilizando un formulario estructurado. Posteriormente, se realizaron análisis descriptivos y, en las asociaciones entre las variables independiente y dependiente, se utilizó la prueba chi-cuadrado de Pearson Resultados:Los grupos de edad con mayor incidencia fueron de 21 a 40 años y de 41 a 60 años, con un 33.8 % cada uno, con predominio del sexo masculino (64.1%). En cuanto a la causa de muerte, predominó el trauma craneoencefálico con un 36.5%. Se entrevistó al 83.3% de familiares y, de este grupo, el 53.5% autorizó la donación. En cuanto a la relación entre las respuestas de las entrevistas a familiares y el sexo del TP, se destacó el sexo masculino con un 59.01% de las entrevistas positivas; en cuanto a la entrevista y grupo de edad no se encontraron diferencias significativas. Correlacionando los resultados de las entrevistas familiares y la causa de muerte, el 40.63% fue por trauma craneoencefálico y, de ese total, el 63.63% tenía autorizada la donación. Conclusión:Los donantes más efectivos fueron jóvenes y varones, con predominio del traumatismo craneoencefálico como causa de muerte encefálica y aceptación familiar de la donación

BACKGROUND: The Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) Living Donor Collective (LDC), the first effort to create a lifetime registry for living donor candidates in the United States, requires transplant programs to register donor candidates while the SRTR conducts follow-up. METHODS: To better understand facilitators and barriers to program participation, we conducted a brief electronic survey of U.S. transplant program staff from October 26, 2021 to December 17, 2021. RESULTS: We received 132 responses, with at least one response from 87 living donor programs (46 kidney programs, 33 kidney and liver programs, and eight liver programs alone). We found 86% of program representatives strongly agreed or agreed that funding adequate to cover the cost of data collection would facilitate LDC participation, 92% agreed or strongly agreed with importance of electronic data submission options, and 74% reported that elimination of requirements to submit duplicative pre-operative information to the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) would be helpful. Other potentially enabling factors include reduction in duration of OPTN postdonation follow-up requirements, ease-of-use, protection from data use for regulation, adequate data security, and equity in data access. CONCLUSION: This survey identifies potential targets to strengthen participation in the effort to create a national living donor registry in the United States. Collaboration and investment to overcome barriers to LDC participation among transplant programs are vital to generate long-term data on living donation for donor candidates, donors, and patients in need of transplant.

BACKGROUND: The presence of donor-specific HLA antibodies before transplantation is associated with poor transplantation outcomes. Unacceptable antigens can be assigned for Eurotransplant kidney transplant candidates to prevent kidney offers against which the candidate has developed clinically relevant HLA antibodies. This retrospective cohort study aimed to assess to what degree unacceptable antigens affect access to transplantation in the Eurotransplant Kidney Allocation System (ETKAS).METHODS: Candidates who underwent kidney-only transplantation between 2016 and 2020 were included (n = 19 240). Cox regression was used to quantify the relationship between the relative transplantation rate and virtual panel-reactive antibodies (vPRAs), which is the percentage of the donor pool with unacceptable antigens. Models used accrued dialysis time as the timescale; were stratified by country and blood group of patient and were adjusted for nontransplantable status, patient age, sex, history of kidney transplantations, and prevalence of 0 HLA-DR-mismatched donors.RESULTS: Transplantation rates were 23% lower for vPRA 0.1% to 50%, 51% lower for vPRA 75% to 85%, and decreased rapidly for vPRA of >85%. Prior studies showed significantly lower ETKAS transplantation rates only for highly sensitized patients (vPRA of >85%). The inverse relationship between transplantation rate and vPRA is independent of Eurotransplant country, listing time, and 0 HLA-DR-mismatched donor availability. Results were similar when quantifying the relationship between vPRA and attainment of a sufficiently high rank for an ETKAS offer, suggesting lower transplantation rates for immunized patients are due to current ETKAS allocation.CONCLUSIONS: Immunized patients face lower transplantation rates across Eurotransplant. The current ETKAS allocation mechanism inadequately compensates immunized patients for reduced access to transplantation.

AIM OF THE REVIEW: Improving rates of organ donation among patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest who do not survive is an opportunity to save countless lives. The objectives of this scientific statement were to do the following: define the opportunity for organ donation among patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest; identify challenges and opportunities associated with organ donation by patients with cardiac arrest; identify strategies, including a generic protocol for organ donation after cardiac arrest, to increase the rate and consistency of organ donation from this population; and provide rationale for including organ donation as a key clinical outcome for all future cardiac arrest clinical trials and registries. METHODS: The scope of this International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation scientific statement was approved by the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation board and the American Heart Association, posted on ILCOR.org for public comment, and then assigned by section to primary and secondary authors. A unique literature search was completed and updated for each section. RESULTS: There are a number of defining pathways for patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest to become organ donors; however, modifications in the Maastricht classification system need to be made to correctly identify these donors and to report outcomes with consistency. Suggested modifications to the minimum data set for reporting cardiac arrests will increase reporting of organ donation as an important resuscitation outcome. There are a number of challenges with implementing uncontrolled donation after cardiac death protocols, and the greatest impediment is the lack of legislation in most countries to mandate organ donation as the default option. Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation has the potential to increase organ donation rates, but more research is needed to derive neuroprognostication rules to guide clinical decision-making about when to stop ex

The ISSCR has developed the Informed Consent Standards for Human Fetal Tissue Donation and Research to promote uniformity and transparency in tissue donation and collection. This standard is designed to assist those working with and overseeing the regulation of such tissue and reassure the wider community and public.

Racial/ethnic minorities experience higher rates of wait-list mortality and longer waiting times on the liver transplant wait list. We hypothesized that racial/ethnic minorities may encounter greater logistical barriers to maintaining "readiness" on the wait list, as reflected in offer nonacceptance. We identified all candidates who received an organ offer between 2009 and 2018 and investigated candidates who did not accept an organ offer using a free-text refusal reason associated with refusal code 801. We isolated patients who did not accept an organ offer due to "candidate-related logistical reasons" and evaluated their characteristics. We isolated 94,006 "no 801" patients and 677 "with 801 logistical" patients. Common reasons for offer decline among the 677 were 60% "unable to travel/distance," 22% "cannot be contacted," 13% "not ready/unspecified," and 5% "financial/insurance." Compared to "no 801," "with 801 logistical" patients were more likely to be Hispanic (19% vs. 15%, P < 0.01). Multivariate logistic modeling showed Hispanic (odds ratio [OR] 1.44, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.17-1.76, P < 0.01) and multiracial/other ethnicity (OR 1.82, 95% CI 1.08-3.05, P = 0.02) were associated with "with 801 logistical" status. The "with 801 logistical" patients were listed with higher allocation (inclusive of exception points) Model for End-Stage Liver Disease scores (16 vs. 15, P < 0.01) and remained longer on the wait list (median 428 days vs. 187 days, P < 0.01). Conclusion: In this analysis of wait-list candidates, we isolated 677 patients who declined an organ offer with a free-text reason consistent with a "candidate-related logistical reason." Compared with non-Hispanic Whites, Hispanics were at 1.44 odds of not accepting organ offers due to logistical reasons. These limited findings motivate further research into interventions that would improve candidates' "readiness" to accept organ of

BackgroundThe Public Health Service Increased Risk designation identified organ donors at increased risk of transmitting hepatitis B, hepatitis C, and human immunodeficiency virus. Despite clear data demonstrating a low absolute risk of disease transmission from these donors, patients are hesitant to consent to receiving organs from these donors. We hypothesize that patients who consent to receiving offers from these donors have decreased time to transplant and decreased waitlist mortality.MethodsWe performed a single-center retrospective review of all-comers waitlisted for liver transplant from 2013 to 2019. The three competing risk events (transplant, death, and removal from transplant list) were analyzed. 1603 patients were included, of which 1244 (77.6%) consented to offers from increased risk donors.ResultsCompared to those who did not consent, those who did had 2.3 times the rate of transplant (SHR 2.29, 95% CI 1.88-2.79, p < 0.0001), with a median time to transplant of 11 months versus 14 months (p < 0.0001), as well as a 44% decrease in the rate of death on the waitlist (SHR 0.56, 95% CI 0.42-0.74, p < 0.0001). All findings remained significant after controlling for the recipient age, race, gender, blood type, and MELD. Of those who did not consent, 63/359 (17.5%) received a transplant, all of which were from standard criteria donors, and of those who did consent, 615/1244 (49.4%) received a transplant, of which 183/615 (29.8%) were from increased risk donors.ConclusionsThe findings of decreased rates of transplantation and increased risk of death on the waiting list by patients who were unwilling to accept risks of viral transmission of 1/300-1/1000 in the worst case scenarios suggests that this consent process may be harmful especially when involving "trigger" words such as HIV. The rigor of the consent process for the use of these organs was recently changed but a broader discussion about informed consent in similar situations is import

Racial/ethnic minorities experience higher rates of wait-list mortality and longer waiting times on the liver transplant wait list. We hypothesized that racial/ethnic minorities may encounter greater logistical barriers to maintaining "readiness" on the wait list, as reflected in offer nonacceptance. We identified all candidates who received an organ offer between 2009 and 2018 and investigated candidates who did not accept an organ offer using a free-text refusal reason associated with refusal code 801. We isolated patients who did not accept an organ offer due to "candidate-related logistical reasons" and evaluated their characteristics. We isolated 94,006 "no 801" patients and 677 "with 801 logistical" patients. Common reasons for offer decline among the 677 were 60% "unable to travel/distance," 22% "cannot be contacted," 13% "not ready/unspecified," and 5% "financial/insurance." Compared to "no 801," "with 801 logistical" patients were more likely to be Hispanic (19% vs. 15%, P < 0.01). Multivariate logistic modeling showed Hispanic (odds ratio [OR] 1.44, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.17-1.76, P < 0.01) and multiracial/other ethnicity (OR 1.82, 95% CI 1.08-3.05, P = 0.02) were associated with "with 801 logistical" status. The "with 801 logistical" patients were listed with higher allocation (inclusive of exception points) Model for End-Stage Liver Disease scores (16 vs. 15, P < 0.01) and remained longer on the wait list (median 428 days vs. 187 days, P < 0.01). Conclusion: In this analysis of wait-list candidates, we isolated 677 patients who declined an organ offer with a free-text reason consistent with a "candidate-related logistical reason." Compared with non-Hispanic Whites, Hispanics were at 1.44 odds of not accepting organ offers due to logistical reasons. These limited findings motivate further research into interventions that would improve candidates' "readiness" to accept organ of

BackgroundThe Public Health Service Increased Risk designation identified organ donors at increased risk of transmitting hepatitis B, hepatitis C, and human immunodeficiency virus. Despite clear data demonstrating a low absolute risk of disease transmission from these donors, patients are hesitant to consent to receiving organs from these donors. We hypothesize that patients who consent to receiving offers from these donors have decreased time to transplant and decreased waitlist mortality.MethodsWe performed a single-center retrospective review of all-comers waitlisted for liver transplant from 2013 to 2019. The three competing risk events (transplant, death, and removal from transplant list) were analyzed. 1603 patients were included, of which 1244 (77.6%) consented to offers from increased risk donors.ResultsCompared to those who did not consent, those who did had 2.3 times the rate of transplant (SHR 2.29, 95% CI 1.88-2.79, p < 0.0001), with a median time to transplant of 11 months versus 14 months (p < 0.0001), as well as a 44% decrease in the rate of death on the waitlist (SHR 0.56, 95% CI 0.42-0.74, p < 0.0001). All findings remained significant after controlling for the recipient age, race, gender, blood type, and MELD. Of those who did not consent, 63/359 (17.5%) received a transplant, all of which were from standard criteria donors, and of those who did consent, 615/1244 (49.4%) received a transplant, of which 183/615 (29.8%) were from increased risk donors.ConclusionsThe findings of decreased rates of transplantation and increased risk of death on the waiting list by patients who were unwilling to accept risks of viral transmission of 1/300-1/1000 in the worst case scenarios suggests that this consent process may be harmful especially when involving "trigger" words such as HIV. The rigor of the consent process for the use of these organs was recently changed but a broader discussion about informed consent in similar situations is import

Potential regional variations in effects of COVID-19 on federally mandated, program-specific evaluations by the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) have been controversial. SRTR January 2022 program evaluations ended transplant follow-up on March 12, 2020, and excluded transplants performed from March 13, 2020 to June 12, 2020 (the "carve-out"). This study examined the carve-out's impact, and the effect of additionally censoring COVID-19 deaths, on first-year posttransplant outcomes for transplants from July 2018 through December 2020. Program-specific hazard ratios (HRs) for graft failure and death estimated under two alternative scenarios were compared with published HRs: (1) the carve-out was removed; (2) the carve-out was retained, but deaths due to COVID-19 were additionally censored. The HRs estimated by censoring COVID-19 deaths were highly correlated with those estimated with the carve-out alone (r2  = .96). Removal of the carve-out resulted in greater variation in HRs while remaining highly correlated (r2  = .82); however, little geographic impact of the carve-out was observed. The carve-out increased average HR in the Northwest by 0.049; carve-out plus censoring reduced average HR in the Midwest by 0.009. Other regions of the country were not significantly affected. Thus, the current COVID-19 carve-out does not appear to impart substantial bias based on the region of the country.

This cross-sectional study quantifies the number of randomized clinical trials in the literature for each indication for stem cell transplantation by disease type and status.

Increasing numbers of compatible pairs are choosing to enter paired exchange programs, but motivations, outcomes, and system-level effects of participation are not well described. Using a linkage of the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients and National Kidney Registry, we compared outcomes of traditional (originally incompatible) recipients to originally compatible recipients using the Kaplan-Meier method. We identified 154 compatible pairs. Most pairs sought to improve HLA matching. Compared to the original donor, actual donors were younger (39 vs. 50 years, p < .001), less often female (52% vs. 68%, p < .01), higher BMI (27 vs. 25 kg/m², p = .03), less frequently blood type O (36% vs. 80%, p < .001), and had higher eGFR (99 vs. 94 ml/min/1.73 m², p = .02), with a better LKDPI (median 7 vs. 22, p < .001). We observed no differences in graft failure or mortality. Compatible pairs made 280 additional transplants possible, many in highly sensitized recipients with long wait times. Compatible pair recipients derived several benefits from paired exchange, including better donor quality. Living donor pairs should receive counseling regarding all options available, including kidney paired donation. As more compatible pairs choose to enter exchange programs, consideration should be given to optimizing compatible pair and hard-to-transplant recipient outcomes.

As a result of ongoing regional disparities, the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) implemented policy in May 2019 limiting exception points for waitlisted patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) to median Model for End-Stage Liver Disease at transplant in the area surrounding a transplant center minus 3 points (MMAT-3). The impact of this policy change remains unknown. We included adult patients with HCC (n = 4567) and without HCC (n = 19,773) in the UNOS database added to the waiting list before this policy change (May 7, 2017-May 18, 2019) and after (May 19, 2019-March 7, 2020). Cumulative incidence analysis estimated the probability of dropout within 1 year of listing decreased from 12.9% before the policy to 11.1% after the policy in candidates without HCC and from 14% to 10.7% in candidates with HCC. Incidence rates of liver transplantation (LT) and waitlist dropout varied significantly before the policy in patients with HCC and without HCC but nearly equalized in the postpolicy era. These effects were observed in both shorter and longer wait regions. With policy change being modeled as a time-dependent covariate, competing risk regression analyses estimated a decreased risk of dropout after policy change in the non-HCC group (cause-specific hazard ratio, 0.91; P = 0.02) after adjusting for demographic variables. These results suggest that the MMAT-3 policy has successfully reduced disparities in access to LT including across UNOS wait regions, although certain patients with HCC are now disadvantaged.

In this review article, we discuss the model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score and its dual purpose in general and transplant hepatology. As the landscape of liver disease and transplantation has evolved considerably since the advent of the MELD score, we summarise emerging concepts, methodologies, and technologies that may improve mortality prognostication in the future. Finally, we explore how these novel concepts and technologies may be incorporated into clinical practice.

Equity is a core principle in both pediatrics and solid organ transplantation. Health inequities, specifically across race, socioeconomic position, or geography, reflect a moral failure. Ethical principles of prudential life span, maximin principle, and fair innings argue for allocation priority to children related to the number of life years gained, equal access to transplant, and equal opportunity for ideal posttransplant outcomes. Iterative policy changes have aimed to narrow these disparities to achieve pediatric transplant equity. These policy changes have focused on modifying pediatric priority for organ allocation to eliminate mortality on the pediatric transplant waiting list. Yet disparities remain in pediatric liver transplantation at all time points: from access to referral for transplantation, likelihood of living donor transplantation, use of exception narratives, waitlist mortality, and inequitable posttransplant outcomes. Black children are less likely to be petitioned for exception scores, have higher waitlist mortality, are less likely to be the recipient of a living donor transplant, and have worse posttransplant outcomes compared with White children. Children living in the most socioeconomically deprived neighborhoods have worse posttransplant outcomes. Children living farther from a transplant center have higher waitlist mortality. Herein we review the current knowledge of these racial and ethnic, socioeconomic, and geographic disparities for these children. To achieve equity, stakeholder engagement is required at all levels from providers and health delivery systems, learning networks, institutions, and society. Future initiatives must be swift, bold, and effective with the tripartite mission to inform policy changes, improve health care delivery, and optimize resource allocation to provide equitable transplant access, waitlist survival, and posttransplant outcomes for all children.

Donation-after-circulatory-death (DCD), donation-after-brain-death (DBD), and living-donation (LD) are the three possible options for liver transplantation (LT), each with unique benefits and complication rates. We aimed to compare DCD-, DBD-, and LD-LT-specific graft survival and biliary complications (BC). We collected data on 138 DCD-, 3,027 DBD- and 318 LD-LTs adult recipients from a single center and analyzed patient/graft survival. BC (leak and anastomotic/non-anastomotic stricture (AS/NAS)) were analyzed in a subset of 414 patients. One-/five-year graft survival were 88.6%/70.0% for DCD-LT, 92.6%/79.9% for DBD-LT, and, 91.7%/82.9% for LD-LT. DCD-LTs had a 1.7-/1.3-fold adjusted risk of losing their graft compared to DBD-LT and LD-LT, respectively (p < 0.010/0.403). Bile leaks were present in 10.1% (DCD-LTs), 7.2% (DBD-LTs), and 36.2% (LD-LTs) (ORs, DBD/LD vs. DCD: 0.7/4.2, p = 0.402/<0.001). AS developed in 28.3% DCD-LTs, 18.1% DBD-LTs, and 43.5% LD-LTs (ORs, DBD/LD vs. DCD: 0.5/1.8, p = 0.018/0.006). NAS was present in 15.2% DCD-LTs, 1.4% DBDs-LT, and 4.3% LD-LTs (ORs, DBD/LD vs. DCD: 0.1/0.3, p = 0.001/0.005). LTs w/o BC had better liver graft survival compared to any other groups with BC. DCD-LT and LD-LT had excellent graft survival despite significantly higher BC rates compared to DBD-LT. DCD-LT represents a valid alternative whose importance should increase further with machine/perfusion systems.

Objective: To determine the level of knowledge of organ donation (LKD) in tenth-semester Human Medicine students and its relationship with some sociodemographic variables. Materials and methods: A cross-sectional survey study conducted with 121 students from a Peruvian university. A questionnaire consisting of five sociodemographic characteristics and 10 questions about LKD was used. Besides the descriptive analysis, a chi-square test was used to compare LKD with the sociodemographic characteristics, considering a significant relationship when the p value was less than 0.05. Results: The average age of the students was 23 ± 2.3 years, 51.2 % were males, 78.5 % practiced a religion, 83.5 % acquired their knowledge in an academic environment and 24.8 % had a family member or close friend who needed an organ transplant. Forty-seven percent (47 %), 42 % and 11 % of the students had a high, medium and low LKD, respectively. According to the bivariate analysis, there was no relationship between LKD and the age group of the students (p = 0.696), their sex (p = 0.794), the origin of their knowledge (p = 0.734) or having an acquaintance who needed an organ donation (p = 0.269); however, it was related (p = 0.008; 95% CI 0.008 – 0.011) to practicing a religion. Conclusions: Most tenth-semester Human Medicine students had a high LKD, which was related to practicing a religion., Objetivo: Establecer el nivel de conocimiento sobre donación de órganos (NCD) de los estudiantes del décimo semestre de la carrera profesional de Medicina Humana y su relación con algunas variables sociodemográficas. Materiales y métodos: Se realizó un estudio transversal, tipo encuesta, en el cual se incluyeron 121 alumnos de una universidad peruana. Se utilizó un cuestionario que contiene 5 características sociodemográficas y 10 preguntas acerca del NCD. Además del análisis descriptivo, se comparó el NCD con las características sociodemográficas, para lo cual se utilizó el estadístico ji al cuadrado, considerando una relación significativa cuando el valor de p fue menor de 0,05. Resultados: La edad promedio de los alumnos fue de 23 ± 2,3 años, 51,2 % fueron de sexo masculino, 78,5 % profesaban alguna religión, 83,5 % adquirieron sus conocimientos de un entorno académico y 24,8 % tuvieron un familiar o amigo cercano que necesitaba trasplante de órganos. El 47 % registraron un NCD alto; 42 %, medio, y 11 %, bajo. En el análisis bivariado no se encontró relación entre el NCD según el grupo etario (p = 0,696), el sexo (p = 0,794), el origen de su conocimiento (p = 0,734) o si tuvieron un contacto cercano relacionado a donación (p = 0,269); pero sí se relacionó favorablemente (p = 0,008; IC 95% 0,008-0,011) con profesar alguna religión. Conclusiones: La mayoría de los alumnos del décimo semestre de la carrera de Medicina Humana tuvieron un NCD alto, y este hallazgo estuvo relacionado a que los alumnos profesaban alguna religión.

The COVID-19 pandemic has influenced organ transplantation decision making. Opinions regarding the utilization of coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) donors are mixed. We hypothesize that COVID-19 infection of deceased solid organ transplant donors does not affect recipient survival. All deceased solid organ transplant donors with COVID-19 testing results from March 15, 2020 to September 30, 2021 were identified in the OPTN database. Donors were matched to recipients and stratified by the COVID-19 test result. Outcomes were assessed between groups. COVID-19 test results were available for 17 694 donors; 150 were positive. A total of 269 organs were transplanted from these donors, including 187 kidneys, 57 livers, 18 hearts, 5 kidney-pancreases, and 2 lungs. The median time from COVID-19 testing to organ recovery was 4 days for positive and 3 days for negative donors. Of these, there were 8 graft failures (3.0%) and 5 deaths (1.9%). Survival of patients receiving grafts from COVID-19-positive donors is equivalent to those receiving grafts from COVID-19-negative donors (30-day patient survival = 99.2% COVID-19 positive; 98.6% COVID-19 negative). Solid organ transplantation using deceased donors with positive COVID-19 results does not negatively affect early patient survival, though little information regarding donor COVID-19 organ involvement is known. While transplantation is feasible, more information regarding COVID-19-positive donor selection is needed.

The ISSCR has developed the Informed Consent Standards for Human Fetal Tissue Donation and Research to promote uniformity and transparency in tissue donation and collection. This standard is designed to assist those working with and overseeing the regulation of such tissue and reassure the wider community and public.

Individuals who register as body donors do so for various reasons, with aiding medical science a common motivation. Despite awareness of several key reasons for donation, there are few in-depth explorations of these motivations to contextualize persons' reasons for donating. This study undertakes a mixed-method exploration of motivations for body donation to facilitate deeper understanding of the reasons underpinning donor registration. A survey of all newly registered body donors at a New Zealand university was performed over a single year. The survey included basic demographic information, a categorical question on reason for donation, a free-text question on donation motivation, and a free-text question allowing "other" comments on body donation. Basic statistical analysis was performed on demographic and categorical data, and thematic analysis used on free-text responses. From 169 registrants, 126 people (average age 70.5 years; 72 female) returned completed surveys (response rate 75%). Categorical data indicate a primary motivation of aiding medical science (86%). Fifty-one respondents (40%) provided free-text data on motivation, with other comments related to motivation provided by forty-one (33%). Common themes included reference to usefulness, uniqueness (pathophysiology and anatomy), gift-giving, kinship, and impermanence of the physical body. Consistent with previous studies, the primary reason for body donation was aiding medical science, however underpinning this was a complex layer of themes and sub-themes shaping motivations for choices. Findings provide important information that can guide development of robust informed consent processes, aid appropriate thanksgiving service delivery, and further contextualize the importance of medical professionals in body donation culture.

ObjectivesSerologic testing for antibodies to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in potential donors of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) convalescent plasma (CCP) may not be performed until after blood donation. A hospital-based recruitment program for CCP may be an efficient way to identify potential donors prospectively.MethodsPatients who recovered from known or suspected COVID-19 were identified and recruited through medical record searches and public appeals in March and April 2020. Participants were screened with a modified donor history questionnaire and, if eligible, were asked for consent and tested for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies (IgG and IgM). Participants positive for SARS-CoV-2 IgG were referred for CCP collection.ResultsOf 179 patients screened, 128 completed serologic testing and 89 were referred for CCP donation. IgG antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 were detected in 23 of 51 participants with suspected COVID-19 and 66 of 77 participants with self-reported COVID-19 confirmed by polymerase chain reaction (PCR). The anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG level met the US Food and Drug Administration criteria for "high-titer" CCP in 39% of participants confirmed by PCR, as measured by the Ortho VITROS IgG assay. A wide range of SARS-CoV-2 IgG levels were observed.ConclusionsA hospital-based CCP donor recruitment program can prospectively identify potential CCP donors. Variability in SARS-CoV-2 IgG levels has implications for the selection of CCP units for transfusion.

To predict whether the COVID-19 pandemic and transplant center responses could have resulted in preventable deaths, we analyzed registry information of the US end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patient population awaiting kidney transplantation. Data were from the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN), the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the United States Renal Data System. Based on 2019 OPTN reports, annualized reduction in kidney transplantation of 25%-100% could result in excess deaths of wait-listed (deceased donor) transplant candidates from 84 to 337 and living donor candidate excess deaths from 35 to 141 (total 119-478 potentially preventable deaths of transplant candidates). Changes in transplant activity due to COVID-19 varied with some centers shutting down while others simply heeded known or suspected pandemic risks. Understanding potential excess mortality for ESRD transplant candidates when circumstances compel curtailment of transplant activity may inform policy and procedural aspects of organ transplant systems allowing ways to best inform patients and families as to potential risks in shuttering organ transplant activity. Considering that more than 700 000 Americans have ESRD with 100 000 awaiting a kidney transplant, our highest annual estimate of 478 excess total deaths from postponing kidney transplantation seems modest.

A novel coronavirus has had global impact on individual health and health care delivery. In this C4 article, contributors discuss various aspects of transplantation including donor and recipient screening, management of infected patients, and prevention of coronavirus disease (COVID). Donor screening with SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid testing (NAT) close to the time of procurement is recommended. Many programs are also screening all potential recipients at the time of admission. The management of COVID has evolved with remdesivir emerging as a new potential option for transplant recipients. Dexamethasone has also shown promise and convalescent plasma is under study. Prevention strategies for transplant candidates and recipients are paramount. Pediatric-specific issues are also discussed. Strategies for the psychological well-being of patients and providers are also imperative, in addition to future research priorities for transplantation.

A decision to withdraw life-sustaining treatment (WLST) is derived by a conclusion that further treatment will not enable a patient to survive or will not produce a functional outcome with acceptable quality of life that the patient and the treating team regard as beneficial. Although many hospitalized patients die under such circumstances, controlled donation after the circulatory determination of death (cDCDD) programs have been developed only in a reduced number of countries. This International Collaborative Statement aims at expanding cDCDD in the world to help countries progress towards self-sufficiency in transplantation and offer more patients the opportunity of organ donation. The Statement addresses three fundamental aspects of the cDCDD pathway. First, it describes the process of determining a prognosis that justifies the WLST, a decision that should be prior to and independent of any consideration of organ donation and in which transplant professionals must not participate. Second, the Statement establishes the permanent cessation of circulation to the brain as the standard to determine death by circulatory criteria. Death may be declared after an elapsed observation period of 5 min without circulation to the brain, which confirms that the absence of circulation to the brain is permanent. Finally, the Statement highlights the value of perfusion repair for increasing the success of cDCDD organ transplantation. cDCDD protocols may utilize either in situ or ex situ perfusion consistent with the practice of each country. Methods to accomplish the in situ normothermic reperfusion of organs must preclude the restoration of brain perfusion to not invalidate the determination of death.

The National Kidney Registry (NKR) Advanced Donation Program enables living donors the opportunity to donate altruistically, or in advance of a potential recipient's transplant, and to receive a voucher that can be redeemed for a future transplant facilitated by the NKR. Family vouchers allow a donor to identify multiple individuals within their immediate family, with the first person in that group in need of a transplant being prioritized to receive a kidney. An increase in vouchers introduces concerns that demand for future voucher redemptions could exceed the supply of available donors and kidneys. A Monte Carlo simulation model was constructed to estimate the annual number of voucher redemptions relative to the number of kidneys available over a 50-year time horizon under several projected scenarios for growth of the program. In all simulated scenarios, the number of available kidneys exceeded voucher redemptions every year. While not able to account for all real-life scenarios, this simulation study found that the NKR should be able to satisfy the likely redemption of increasing numbers of vouchers under a range of possible scenarios over a 50-year time horizon. This modeling exercise suggests that a donor family's future needs can be satisfied through the voucher program.

We examined the effects of COVID-19 on solid organ waiting list mortality in the United States and compared effects across patient demographics (e.g., race, age, and sex) and donation service areas. Three separate piecewise exponential survival models estimated for each solid organ the overall, demographic-specific, and donation service area-specific differences in the hazard of waitlist mortality before and after the national emergency declaration on March 13, 2020. Kidney waiting list mortality was higher after than before the national emergency (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.37; 95% CI, 1.23-1.52). The hazard of waitlist mortality was not significantly different before and after COVID-19 for liver (aHR, 0.94), pancreas (aHR, 1.01), lung (aHR, 1.00), and heart (aHR, 0.94). Kidney candidates had notable variability in differences across donation service areas (aHRs, New York City, 2.52; New Jersey, 1.84; and Michigan, 1.56). The only demographic group with increased waiting list mortality were Blacks versus Whites (aHR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.07-1.86) for kidney candidates. The first 10 weeks after the declaration of a national emergency had a heterogeneous effect on waitlist mortality rate, varying by geography and ethnicity. This heterogeneity will complicate comparisons of transplant program performance during COVID-19.

To predict whether the COVID-19 pandemic and transplant center responses could have resulted in preventable deaths, we analyzed registry information of the US end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patient population awaiting kidney transplantation. Data were from the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN), the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the United States Renal Data System. Based on 2019 OPTN reports, annualized reduction in kidney transplantation of 25%-100% could result in excess deaths of wait-listed (deceased donor) transplant candidates from 84 to 337 and living donor candidate excess deaths from 35 to 141 (total 119-478 potentially preventable deaths of transplant candidates). Changes in transplant activity due to COVID-19 varied with some centers shutting down while others simply heeded known or suspected pandemic risks. Understanding potential excess mortality for ESRD transplant candidates when circumstances compel curtailment of transplant activity may inform policy and procedural aspects of organ transplant systems allowing ways to best inform patients and families as to potential risks in shuttering organ transplant activity. Considering that more than 700 000 Americans have ESRD with 100 000 awaiting a kidney transplant, our highest annual estimate of 478 excess total deaths from postponing kidney transplantation seems modest.

BACKGROUND The Share 35 policy was introduced in 2013 by the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) to increase opportunities of sicker patients to access liver transplantation. However, it has the disadvantage of higher MELD score associated with adverse postoperative transplant outcomes. Early data after implementation of the Share 35 policy showed significantly poorer post-transplantation survival in some UNOS regions. We aimed to analyze the impact of Share 35 on demographics of patients, perioperative management, and perioperative mortality. MATERIAL AND METHODS A retrospective analysis of data was performed from an institutional liver transplantation cohort from 1 January 2008 to 31 December 2017. Adult patients who underwent liver transplantation before 2013 were defined as the pre-Share 35 group and the other group was defined as the post-Share 35 group. The MELD score of each patient was calculated at the time of transplantation. Perioperative mortality was defined as death within 30 days after the operation. RESULTS A total of 1596 patients underwent liver transplantation. Of those, 895 recipients underwent OLT in the pre-Share 35 era and 737 in the post-Share 35 era. The median MELD score was significantly higher in the post-Share 35 group (30 vs 26, P<0.001) and 45.7% of the post-Share 35 group had MELD scores ≥35. In intraoperative management, patients required significantly more blood component transfusion, intraoperative vasopressor, and fluid replacement. Veno-venous bypass (VVB) usage was significantly higher in the post-Share 35 era (47.2% vs 38.1%, P<0.001). In the subgroup of patients with MELD scores ≥35, the median waiting time was significantly shorter (18.5 vs 14.5 days, P=0.045). Overall perioperative mortality was not significantly difference between groups (P=0.435). CONCLUSIONS After implementation of the Share 35 policy, we performed liver transplantation in significantly higher medical acuity patients, which required

A novel coronavirus has had global impact on individual health and health care delivery. In this C4 article, contributors discuss various aspects of transplantation including donor and recipient screening, management of infected patients, and prevention of coronavirus disease (COVID). Donor screening with SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid testing (NAT) close to the time of procurement is recommended. Many programs are also screening all potential recipients at the time of admission. The management of COVID has evolved with remdesivir emerging as a new potential option for transplant recipients. Dexamethasone has also shown promise and convalescent plasma is under study. Prevention strategies for transplant candidates and recipients are paramount. Pediatric-specific issues are also discussed. Strategies for the psychological well-being of patients and providers are also imperative, in addition to future research priorities for transplantation.

ObjectivesSerologic testing for antibodies to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in potential donors of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) convalescent plasma (CCP) may not be performed until after blood donation. A hospital-based recruitment program for CCP may be an efficient way to identify potential donors prospectively.MethodsPatients who recovered from known or suspected COVID-19 were identified and recruited through medical record searches and public appeals in March and April 2020. Participants were screened with a modified donor history questionnaire and, if eligible, were asked for consent and tested for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies (IgG and IgM). Participants positive for SARS-CoV-2 IgG were referred for CCP collection.ResultsOf 179 patients screened, 128 completed serologic testing and 89 were referred for CCP donation. IgG antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 were detected in 23 of 51 participants with suspected COVID-19 and 66 of 77 participants with self-reported COVID-19 confirmed by polymerase chain reaction (PCR). The anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG level met the US Food and Drug Administration criteria for "high-titer" CCP in 39% of participants confirmed by PCR, as measured by the Ortho VITROS IgG assay. A wide range of SARS-CoV-2 IgG levels were observed.ConclusionsA hospital-based CCP donor recruitment program can prospectively identify potential CCP donors. Variability in SARS-CoV-2 IgG levels has implications for the selection of CCP units for transfusion.

BackgroundWith the implementation of the "Safety Net," we aimed to determine the impact of simultaneous liver-kidney transplantation (SLKT), as compared to kidney transplant after liver transplant (KALT), on kidney allograft failure (KF).MethodsAn analysis of the UNOS database for all adult patients who received either an SLKT or KALT from 2002 to 2017. The outcomes were 90-day KF and 1-year KF (as reported to UNOS, at 90- and 365-day postkidney transplant, respectively). We compared the following groups of patients: SLKT <25 (SLKT with final model for end-stage liver disease [MELD] <25), SLKT25/35 (MELD ≥25/<35), and SLKT35 (MELD ≥35) to KALT.ResultsOf the 6276 patients, there were 1481 KALT, 1579 SLKT <25, 1832 SLKT25/35, and 1384 SLKT ≥35. The proportion of patients with 90-day and 1-year KF increased significantly among the KALT, SLKT <25, SLKT25/35, and SLKT ≥35 groups (P < 0.001; test for trend): 90-day KF: 3.3% versus 5.5% versus 7.3% versus 9.3% and 1-year KF: 5.1% versus 9.4% versus 12.3% versus 14.7%. After adjustment and compared with KALT, beginning at an MELD ≥25 those undergoing SLKT had significantly higher risk of 90-day and 1-year KF: 90-day KF: SLKT25/35: hazard ratio, 1.6(1.0-2.3); SLKT ≥35: 2.1(1.3-3.3); 1-year KF: SLKT25/35: hazard ratio, 1.7(1.2-2.4); SLKT ≥35: 2.1(1.5-3.0).ConclusionsAs compared to KALT recipients, SLKT recipients with an MELD ≥25 had significantly higher risk of early KF. Given the now well-established "Safety Net," KALT may serve as an opportunity to improve kidney outcomes in patients with an MELD ≥25.

One in 10 people die awaiting transplantation from donor shortage. Only half of Americans register as organ donors. In this cross-sectional study, we evaluated population-level associations of neighborhood socioeconomic deprivation and racial segregation on organ donor registration rates. We analyzed state identification card demographic and organ donor registration data from 5 states to estimate the association between a neighborhood socioeconomic deprivation index (range [0, 1]; higher values indicate more deprivation) and a racial index of concentration at the extreme (ICE) (range [-1, 1]; lower values indicate predominantly black neighborhoods, higher values indicate predominantly white neighborhoods) on organ donor registration rates within a specified geography (census tract or ZIP code tabulation area [ZCTA]). Among 26 720 738 registrants, 32% of the sample were registered organ donors. At the census tract level, with each 0.1 decrease in the deprivation index, the organ donor registration rate increased by 6.8% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 6.6%, 7.0%). With each 0.1 increase in the racial ICE, the rate increased by 1.5% (95% CI: 1.5%, 1.6%). These associations held true at the ZCTA level. Areas with less socioeconomic deprivation and a higher concentration of white residents have higher organ donor registration rates. Public health initiatives should consider neighborhood context and novel data sources in designing optimal intervention strategies.

BackgroundDespite the institution of a new Kidney Allocation System in 2014, A2/A2B to B transplantation has not increased as expected. The current Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network policy requires subtyping on two separate occasions, and in the setting of discrepant results, defaulting to the A1 subtype. However, there is significant inherent variability in the serologic assays used for blood group subtyping and genotyping is rarely done.MethodsThe National Kidney Registry, a kidney paired donation (KPD) program, performs serological typing on all A/AB donors, and in cases of non-A1/non-A1B donors, confirmatory genotyping is performed.ResultsBetween 2/18/2018 and 9/15/2020, 13.0% (145) of 1,111 type A donors registered with the NKR were ultimately subtyped as A2 via genotyping. Notably, 49.6% (72) of these were subtyped as A1 at their donor center, and in accordance with OPTN policy, ineligible for allocation as A2.ConclusionInaccurate A2 subtyping represents a significant lost opportunity in transplantation, especially in KPD where A2 donors can not only facilitate living donor transplantation for O and highly sensitized candidates, but can also facilitate additional living donor transplants. This study highlights the need for improved accuracy of subtyping technique, and the need for policy changes encouraging optimal utilization of A2 donor kidneys.

Background & aimsIt has been suggested that patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) at high risk of wait-list dropout would have done poorly after liver transplantation (LT) because of tumour aggressiveness. To test this hypothesis, we analysed risk of wait-list dropout among patients with HCC in long-wait regions (LWRs) to create a dropout risk score, and applied this score in short (SWRs) and mid-wait regions (MWRs) to evaluate post-LT outcomes. We sought to identify a threshold in dropout risk that predicts worse post-LT outcome.MethodsUsing the United Network for Organ Sharing database, including all patients with T2 HCC receiving priority listing from 2010 to 2014, a dropout risk score was created from a developmental cohort of 2,092 patients in LWRs, and tested in a validation cohort of 1,735 patients in SWRs and 2,894 patients in MWRs.ResultsOn multivariable analysis, 1 tumour (3.1-5 cm) or 2-3 tumours, alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) >20 ng/ml, and increasing Child-Pugh and model for end-stage liver disease-sodium scores significantly predicted wait-list dropout. A dropout risk score using these 4 variables (C-statistic 0.74) was able to stratify 1-year cumulative incidence of dropout from 7.1% with a score ≤7 to 39.5% with a score >23. Patients with a dropout risk score >30 had 5-year post-LT survival of 60.1% vs. 71.8% for those with a score ≤30 (p = 0.004). There were no significant differences in post-LT survival below this threshold.ConclusionsThis study provided evidence that patients with HCC with the highest dropout risk have aggressive tumour biology that would also result in poor post-LT outcomes when transplanted quickly. Below this threshold risk score of ≤30, priority status for organ allocation could be stratified based on the predicted risks of wait-list dropout without significant differences in post-LT survival.Lay summaryPrioritising patients with hepatocellular carcinoma for liver transplant based on risk of wait-list dropou

In March 2020, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) spread rapidly nationally, causing widespread emergent changes to the health system. Our goal was to understand the impact of the epidemic on kidney transplantation (KT), at both the national and center levels, accounting statistically for waitlist composition. Using Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients data, we compared data on observed waitlist registrations, waitlist mortality, and living-donor and deceased-donor kidney transplants (LDKT/DDKT) March 15-April 30, 2020 to expected events calculated from preepidemic data January 2016-February 2020. There were few changes before March 15, at which point the number of new listings/DDKT/LDKT dropped to 18%/24%/87% below the expected value (all P < .001). Only 12 centers performed LDKT March 15-31; by April 30, 40 centers had resumed LDKT. The decline in new listings and DDKT was greater among states with higher per capita confirmed COVID-19 cases. The number of waitlist deaths was 2.2-fold higher than expected in the 5 states with highest COVID-19 burden (P < .001). DCD DDKT and regional/national imports declined nationwide but most steeply in states with the highest COVID-19 burden. The COVID-19 epidemic has resulted in substantial changes to KT; we must adapt and learn rapidly to continue to provide safe access to transplantation and limit the growing indirect toll of an already deadly disease.

Rapid autopsy at the end of life in people with HIV (PWH) permits the preservation of valuable tissue specimens for subsequent study of HIV reservoirs. At our institution, we have developed a cohort of PWH who consent to a rapid autopsy to gather a wide range of fluids and tissues with the goal of advancing HIV cure research. The protocol for successfully performing these autopsies has required careful thought and development over months and years. We have now successfully performed six rapid autopsies and detail here our steps to build the study cohort, train and staff a team of more than a dozen personnel, and process and preserve hundreds of samples from each autopsy.

Kidney paired donation (KPD) is a valuable tool to overcome immunological barriers in living donor transplantation. While small national registries encounter difficulties in finding compatible matches, multi-national KPD may be a useful strategy to facilitate transplantation. The Czech (Prague) and Austrian (Vienna) KPD programs, both initiated in 2011, were merged in 2015. A bi-national algorithm allowed for ABO- and low-level HLA antibody-incompatible exchanges, including the option of altruistic donor-initiated domino chains. Between 2011 and 2019, 222 recipients and their incompatible donors were registered. Of those, 95.7% (Prague) and 67.9% (Vienna) entered into KPD registries, and 81 patients received a transplant (95% 3-year graft survival). Inclusion of ABO-incompatible pairs in the Czech program contributed to higher KPD transplant rates (42.6% vs. 23.6% in Austria). After 2015 (11 bi-national match runs), the median pool size increased to 18 pairs, yielding 33 transplants (8 via cross-border exchanges). While matching rates doubled in Austria (from 9.1% to 18.8%), rates decreased in the Czech program, partly due to implementation of more stringent HLA antibody thresholds. Our results demonstrate the feasibility of merging small national KPD programs to increase pool sizes and may encourage the implementation of multi-national registries to expand the full potential of KPD.

IMPORTANCE: The option of donating organs after euthanasia is not well known. Assessment of the results of organ transplants with grafts donated after euthanasia is essential to justify the use of this type of organ donation. OBJECTIVES: To assess the outcomes of liver transplants (LTs) with grafts donated after euthanasia (donation after circulatory death type V [DCD-V]), and to compare them with the results of the more commonly performed LTs with grafts from donors with a circulatory arrest after the withdrawal of life-supporting treatment (type III [DCD-III]). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This retrospective multicenter cohort study analyzed medical records and LT data for most transplant centers in the Netherlands and Belgium. All LTs with DCD-V grafts performed from the start of the donation after euthanasia program (September 2012 for the Netherlands, and January 2005 for Belgium) through July 1, 2018, were included in the analysis. A comparative cohort of patients who received DCD-III grafts was also analyzed. All patients in both cohorts were followed up for at least 1 year. Data analysis was performed from September 2019 to December 2019. EXPOSURES: Liver transplant with either a DCD-V graft or DCD-III graft. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Primary outcomes were recipient and graft survival rates at years 1, 3, and 5 after the LT. Secondary outcomes included postoperative complications (early allograft dysfunction, hepatic artery thrombosis, and nonanastomotic biliary strictures) within the first year after the LT. RESULTS: Among the cohort of 47 LTs with DCD-V grafts, 25 organ donors (53%) were women and the median (interquartile range [IQR]) age was 51 (44-59) years. Among the cohort of 542 LTs with DCD-III grafts, 335 organ donors (62%) were men and the median (IQR) age was 49 (37-57) years. Median (IQR) follow-up was 3.8 (2.1-6.3) years. In the DCD-V cohort, 30 recipients (64%) were men, and the median (IQR) age was 56 (48-64) years. Recipient survival

Rapid autopsy at the end of life in people with HIV (PWH) permits the preservation of valuable tissue specimens for subsequent study of HIV reservoirs. At our institution, we have developed a cohort of PWH who consent to a rapid autopsy to gather a wide range of fluids and tissues with the goal of advancing HIV cure research. The protocol for successfully performing these autopsies has required careful thought and development over months and years. We have now successfully performed six rapid autopsies and detail here our steps to build the study cohort, train and staff a team of more than a dozen personnel, and process and preserve hundreds of samples from each autopsy.

Immunotherapy is now a cornerstone for cancer treatment, and much attention has been placed on the identification of prognostic and predictive biomarkers. The success of biomarker development is dependent on accurate and timely collection of biospecimens and high-quality processing, storage and shipping. Tumors are also increasingly used as source material for the generation of therapeutic T cells. There have been few guidelines or consensus statements on how to optimally collect and manage biospecimens and source material being used for immunotherapy and related research. The Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer Surgery Committee has brought together surgical experts from multiple subspecialty disciplines to identify best practices and to provide consensus on how best to access and manage specific tissues for immuno-oncology treatments and clinical investigation. In addition, the committee recommends early integration of surgeons and other interventional physicians with expertise in biospecimen collection, especially in clinical trials, to optimize the quality of tissue and the validity of correlative clinical studies in cancer immunotherapy.