Search

Background: To evaluate the effect of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) Medicaid expansion on payor mix among patients on the kidney and liver transplant waiting list as well as waiting list and post-transplant outcomes., Design: Using the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients, we performed a secondary data analysis of all patients on the kidney and liver transplant waiting list from 2007 to 2018. We described changes in payor mix by timing of state Medicaid expansion. We used competing risks models to estimate cause-specific hazard ratios for the effects of insurance and era on death/delisting and transplant. We used a Poisson regression model to estimate the effect of insurance and era on incidence rate ratio of inactivations on the waiting list. We used Cox proportional hazards models to estimate the effect of insurance and era on graft and patient survival., Results: A decade after implementation of the ACA, the prevalence of Medicaid beneficiaries listed for transplant increased by 2.5% (from 7.4% to 9.9%) for kidney and by 2.6% (15.3% to 17.9%) for liver. Expansion states had greater increases than nonexpansion states (kidney 3.8% vs 0.6%, liver 5.3% vs -1.8%). Among wait-listed patients, the magnitude of association of Medicaid insurance vs private insurance with transplant decreased over time for kidney candidates (era 1 subdistribution hazard ratio (SHR), 0.62 [95% CI, 0.60-0.64] vs era 3 SHR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.74-0.70]) but increased for liver candidates (era 1 SHR, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.83-0.90] vs era 3 SHR 0.79 [95% CI, 0.77-0.82]). Medicaid-insured kidney and liver recipients had greater hazards of graft failure; this did not change over time (kidney: HR, 1.23 [95% CI, 1.06-1.44] liver: HR, 1.05 [95% CI, 0.94-1.17])., Conclusions: For the millions of patients with chronic kidney and liver diseases, implementation of the ACA has resulted in only modest increases in access to transplant for the publicly insured vs the privately insured., Competing Interests: DISCLOSURE The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this article., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Historically in the United States, kidneys for simultaneous liver-kidney transplantation (SLKT) candidates were allocated with livers, prioritizing SLKT recipients over much of the kidney waiting list. A 2017 change in policy delineated renal function criteria for SLKT and implemented a safety net for kidney-after-liver transplantation. We compared the use and outcomes of SLKT and kidney-after-liver transplant with the 2017 policy. United Network for Organ Sharing Standard Transplant Analysis and Research files were used to identify adults who received liver transplantations (LT) from August 10, 2007 to August 10, 2012; from August 11, 2012 to August 10, 2017; and from August 11, 2017 to June 12, 2019. LT recipients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) were defined by dialysis requirement or estimated glomerular filtration rate <25. We evaluated outcomes and center-level, regional, and national practice before and after the policy change. Nonparametric cumulative incidence of kidney-after-liver listing and transplant were modeled by era. A total of 6332 patients received SLKTs during the study period; fewer patients with glomerular filtration rate (GFR) ≥50 mL/min underwent SLKT over time (5.8%, 4.8%, 3.0%; P = 0.01 ). There was also less variability in GFR at transplant after policy implementation on center and regional levels. We then evaluated LT-alone (LTA) recipients with ESRD (n = 5408 from 2012-2017; n = 2321 after the policy). Listing for a kidney within a year of LT increased from 2.9% before the policy change to 8.8% after the policy change, and the rate of kidney transplantation within 1 year increased from 0.7% to 4% (P < 0.001). After the policy change, there was no difference in patient survival rates between SLKT and LTA among patients with ESRD. Implementation of the 2017 SLKT policy change resulted in reduced variability in SLKT recipient kidney function and increased access to deceased donor kidney transplantation for LTA recipients with kidney disease without negatively affecting outcomes., (Copyright © 2021 American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases.)

Background: The Kidney Allocation System (KAS) was developed to improve equity and utility in organ allocation. We examine the effect of this change on kidney graft distribution and survival., Methods: UNOS data was used to identify first-time adult recipients of a deceased donor kidney-alone transplant pre-KAS (Jan 2012-Dec 2014, n = 26,612) and post-KAS (Jan 2015-Dec 2017, n = 30,701), as well as grafts recovered Jan 2012-Jun 2019., Results: Post-KAS, kidneys were more likely to experience cold ischemia time >24 h (20.0% vs. 18.8%, p < 0.001) and experienced more delayed graft function, though competing risks modeling demonstrated a lower hazard of graft loss post-KAS, HR 0.90 (95% CI 0.84-0.97, p = 0.007). Post-policy, KDPI >85% kidneys were more likely to be shared regionally (37% vs. 14%), and more likely to be discarded (60.6% vs. 54.9%) after the policy change. KDPI >85% graft and patient survival did not change., Conclusions: Implementation of the KAS has increased sharing of high-KDPI kidneys and has decreased the hazard of graft loss without an impact on patient survival., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: We sought to compare kidney transplantation outcomes between Veterans Affairs (VA) and non-VA transplant centers., Summary Background Data: Transplant care at the VA has previously been scrutinized due to geographic and systematic barriers. The recently instituted MISSION Act entered effect June 6th, 2019, which enables veteran access to surgical care at civilian hospitals if certain eligibility criteria are met., Methods: We evaluated observed-to-expected outcome ratios (O:E) for graft loss and mortality using the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients database for all kidney transplants during a 15-year period (July 1, 2001-June 30, 2016). Of 229,188 kidney transplants performed during the study period, 1508 were performed at VA centers (N = 7), 7750 at the respective academic institutions affiliated with these VA centers, and 227,680 at non-VA centers nationwide (N = 286)., Results: Aggregate O:E ratios for mortality were lower in VA centers compared with non-VA centers at 1 month and 1 year (O:E = 0.27 vs 1.00, P = 0.03 and O:E = 0.62 vs 1.00, P = 0.03, respectively). Graft loss at 1 month and 1 year was similar between groups (O:E = 0.65 vs 1.00, P = 0.11 and O:E = 0.79 vs 1.00, P = 0.15, respectively). Ratios for mortality and graft loss were similar between VA centers and their respective academic affiliates. Additionally, a subgroup analysis for graft loss and mortality at 3 years (study period January 1, 2009-December 31, 2013) demonstrated no significant differences between VA centers, VA-affiliates, and all non-VA centers., Conclusions: Despite low clinical volume, VA centers offer excellent outcomes in kidney transplantation. Veteran referral to civilian hospitals should weigh the benefit of geographic convenience and patient preference with center outcomes., Competing Interests: The authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2020 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)