18 Month Review of Liver Acuity Circles Allocation

Purpose: Acuity circles (AC) allocation was implemented on 2/4/2020 with a goal of removing DSA and region from liver allocation and broadening the distribution of livers, particularly for highly medically urgent candidates. Method(s): OPTN waitlist and transplant data was analyzed 18 months pre- (8/6/2018- 2/3/2020) and post- (2/4/2020-8/3/2021) AC implementation. Result(s): Post-policy, there were 448 more adult (age 18+ at listing) and 83 less pediatric (<18 at listing) waitlist additions, 570 more adult (age 18+ at transplant) and 4 less pediatric (<18 at transplant) deceased donor liver-alone transplants, and 121 less adult and 12 less pediatric removals for death or too sick. Transplant rates significantly increased overall post-policy, notably in the most medically urgent groups (Figure 1). The national median transplant score for adults remained unchanged at 28 and decreased from 35 to 30 for pediatric transplant recipients, likely due to the increased number of adolescents (age 12-17) transplanted at MELD scores under 29. There was a noticeable shift in the distribution of distance between donor hospital and transplant program, particularly for the most medically urgent groups where larger proportions of livers are coming from 250-500 NMs (Figure 2). Despite this change, median cold ischemia time increased only 11 minutes for adult recipients and 33 minutes for pediatric recipients post-policy. One year post transplant patient survival decreased from 94% pre-policy to 93% post-policy (p=0.02). Conclusion(s): Broader allocation increased transplant rates and livers are traveling longer distances for candidates with greater medical urgency with little effect on cold ischemia time and post-transplant survival. Unfortunately, AC implementation was followed shortly by COVID-19 making it difficult to parse out COVID-19 from potential policy effects. Metrics will continue to be monitored as more data become available. (Figure Presented).

OPTN/SRTR 2020 Annual Data Report: Liver.

This year was marked by the COVID-19 pandemic, which altered transplant program activity and affected waitlist and transplant outcomes. Still, 8906 liver transplants were performed, an all-time high, across 142 centers in the United States, and pretransplant as well as graft and patient survival metrics, continued to improve. Living donation activity decreased after several years of growth. As of June 30, 2020, 98989 liver transplant recipients were alive with a functioning graft, and in the context of increasing liver transplant volume, the size of both the adult and pediatric liver transplant waitlists have decreased. On February 4, 2020, shortly before the pandemic began, a new liver distribution policy based on acuity circles was implemented, replacing donor service area- and region-based boundaries. A policy change to direct pediatric livers to pediatric recipients led to an increase in deceased donor transplant rates and a decrease in pretransplant mortality rate among children, although the absolute number of pediatric transplants did not increase in 2020. Among adults, alcohol-associated liver disease became the predominant indication for liver transplant in 2020. After implementation of the National Liver Review Board and lower waitlist priority for most exception cases in 2019, fewer liver transplants were being performed via exception points, and the transplant rate between those with and without hepatocellular carcinoma has equalized. Women continue to experience higher pretransplant mortality and lower rates of liver transplant than men.

Impact of COVID-19 crisis on disparities in living kidney donation in the US

Purpose: The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in a dramatic decrease in living kidney donation (LKD) in the U.S. This study investigated the effect of the COVID crisis on characteristics of LKD recipients in the U.S. Methods: We used OPTN transplant and LKD data to compare proportions of LKD recipients' race, SES (neighborhood income), sex, dialysis status, age, and recipient/ donor sex match during 3 eras: Pre-COVID (1/1/20-3/12/20, n=1294);COVID Shutdown (3/13/20-5/9/20, n=173);and COVID Stabilization (5/10/20-11/15/20, n=2331;Table 1). Results: Contrary to our expectations, LKD recipients' race, neighborhood income, and dialysis status at transplant did not differ by era (Figure 1a-c;Table 2). We did, however, find a significant relationship between recipient sex and era, with a higher proportion of male recipients in the COVID Shutdown and COVID Stabilization eras than in the Pre-COVID era (Figure 1d). We found a related significant association between recipient/donor sex match and era, with a higher proportion of male-recipient/female-donor transplants and a lower proportion of female-recipient/ female-donor transplants in the COVID Shutdown and COVID Stabilization eras than in the Pre-COVID era (Figure 1e). There was a marginally significant relationship between recipient age at transplant and era, with a higher proportion of younger recipients in the COVID Shutdown era than in the Pre-COVID and COVID Stabilization eras (Figure 1f). Conclusions: While we did not find expected differences in areas of current disparities such as LKD recipient race or SES, we did find that the drop in living donation caused by the COVID crisis exacerbated previously existing disparities in recipient sex and recipient/donor sex match, suggesting that COVID has not had an equal effect on all candidates. (Table Presented).