Exception Policy Change Increased the Simultaneous Kidney-Liver Transplant Probability of Polycystic Disease in the Centers With High Median MELD at Transplantation.

BACKGROUND: In 2019, Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network/United Network for Organ Sharing changed the exception policy for liver allocation to the median model for end-stage liver disease at transplantation (MMaT). This study evaluated the effects of this change on-waitlist outcomes of simultaneous liver-kidney transplantation (SLKT) for patients with polycystic liver-kidney disease (PLKD). METHODS: Using the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network/United Network for Organ Sharing registry, 317 patients with PLKD listed for SLKT between January 2016 and December 2021 were evaluated. Waitlist outcomes were compared between prepolicy (Era 1) and postpolicy (Era 2) eras. RESULTS: One-year transplant probability was significantly higher in Era 2 than in Era 1 (55.7% versus 37.9%; P  = 0.001), and the positive effect on transplant probability of Era 2 was significant after risk adjustment (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.76; 95% confidence interval, 1.22-2.54; P  = 0.002 [ref. Era 1]), whereas waitlist mortality was comparable. Transplant centers were separated into the high and low MMaT groups with a score of 29 (median MMaT) and transplant probability in each group between eras was compared. In the high MMaT transplant centers, the 1-y transplant probability was significantly higher in Era 2 (27.5% versus 52.4%; P  = 0.003). The positive effect remained significant in the high MMaT center group (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.79; 95% confidence interval, 1.43-5.46; P  = 0.003 [ref. Era 1]) but not in the low MMaT center group. Although there was a difference between center groups in Era 1 ( P  = 0.006), it became comparable in Era 2 ( P  = 0.54). CONCLUSIONS: The new policy increased 1-y SLKT probability in patients with PKLD and successfully reduced the disparities based on center location.

Improved Waitlist Outcomes in Liver Transplant Patients With Mid-MELD-Na Scores Listed in Centers Receptive to Use of Organs Donated After Circulatory Death.

BACKGROUND: Liver transplant (LT) using organs donated after circulatory death (DCD) has been increasing in the United States. We investigated whether transplant centers' receptiveness to use of DCD organs impacted patient outcomes. METHODS: Transplant centers were classified as very receptive (group 1), receptive (2), or less receptive (3) based on the DCD acceptance rate and DCD transplant percentage. Using organ procurement and transplantation network/UNOS registry data for 20 435 patients listed for LT from January 2020 to June 2022, we compared rates of 1-y transplant probability and waitlist mortality between groups, broken down by model for end-stage liver disease-sodium (MELD-Na) categories. RESULTS: In adjusted analyses, patients in group 1 centers with MELD-Na scores 6 to 29 were significantly more likely to undergo transplant than those in group 3 (aHR range 1.51-2.11, P < 0.001). Results were similar in comparisons between groups 1 and 2 (aHR range 1.41-1.81, P < 0.001) and between groups 2 and 3 with MELD-Na 15-24 (aHR 1.19-1.20, P < 0.007). Likewise, patients with MELD-Na score 20 to 29 in group 1 centers had lower waitlist mortality than those in group 3 (scores, 20-24: aHR, 0.71, P = 0.03; score, 25-29: aHR, 0.51, P < 0.001); those in group 1 also had lower waitlist mortality compared with group 2 (scores 20-24: aHR0.69, P = 0.02; scores 25-29: aHR 0.63, P = 0.03). One-year posttransplant survival of DCD LT patients did not vary significantly compared with donation after brain dead. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that transplant centers' use of DCD livers can improve waitlist outcomes, particularly among mid-MELD-Na patients.

A Share 21 model in liver transplantation: Impact on waitlist outcomes.

With the introduction of Model for End-Stage Liver Disease-Sodium (MELD-Na)-based allocation, the score at which patients benefit from liver transplantation (LT) has shifted from a score of 15 to 21. This study aimed to evaluate waitlist outcomes in patients with MELD-Na scores <21 and explore the utility of replacing "Share 15" with "Share 21." The study uses data from the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network/United Network for Organ Sharing registry. All adult patients registered for LT after implementation of the MELD-Na-based allocation were evaluated. Waitlist patients with initial and final scores <21 were eligible. Patients with exception scores were excluded. To explore the potential impact of a Share 21 model, patients with an initial MELD-Na score of 6-14 (Group 1) and those with a score of 15-20 (Group 2) were compared for waitlist outcomes. There were 3686 patients with an initial score of 6-14 (Group 1) and 3282 with a score of 15-20 (Group 2). Group 2, when compared to Group 1, showed comparable risk of mortality (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.00, P = .97), higher transplant probability (aHR 3.25, P < .001), and lower likelihood of removal from listing because of improvement (aHR 0.74, P = .011). Share 21 may enhance transplant opportunities and increase parity for patients with higher MELD-Na scores without compromising waitlist outcomes.

Increased Risk of Death in First Year After Liver Transplantation Among Patients With Nonalcoholic Steatohepatitis vs Liver Disease of Other Etiologies.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: An increasing number of patients with non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) require liver transplantation. We compared outcomes of patients with liver diseases of different etiologies (NASH, hepatitis C virus [HCV]-associated liver disease, and alcohol-associated liver disease [ALD]). METHODS: We analyzed data from the United Network for Organ Sharing registry on 6344 patients who underwent liver transplantation for NASH, 17,037 for cirrhosis from chronic HCV infection, and 9279 for ALD. We collected data from patients who underwent liver transplantation during the following time periods: 2008-2010, 2011-2013, 2014-2015, 2016-2017. We compared outcomes of different groups using Cox regression models, adjusting for donor and recipient characteristics. RESULTS: For patients who underwent liver transplantation during 2016-2017, a significantly lower proportion of patients with NASH survived for 1 year after transplantation than patients with HCV (P = .004) or ALD (P < .001). During this time period, the adjusted risk of death within 1 year was significantly higher for patients with NASH than with ALD (hazard ratio, 1.37; P = .03), regardless of the presence of hepatocellular carcinoma. The effects of increasing age were greatest among patients with NASH: compared to patients younger than 50 years, hazard ratios for overall mortality were 1.31 for patients 50-59 years (P = .02), 1.66 for patients 60-64 years (P < .001), 2.08 for patients 65-69 years (P < .001), and 2.66 and for patients and ≥70 years (P < .001). Mortality from cardiovascular or cerebrovascular disease(s) was highest among patients with NASH, accounting for 11.5% of deaths, compared to 7.0% of deaths in patients with HCV infection and 9.6% in patients with ALD (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: In an analysis of data from patients who underwent liver transplantation during 2016-2017, we found the risk of death within 1 year after transplant was higher among patients with NASH than HCV-associated liver disease or ALD. Risk of death increased with age, and patients with NASH have a higher risk of death from cardiovascular or cerebrovascular disease.

Effects of Allocating Livers for Transplantation Based on Model for End-Stage Liver Disease-Sodium Scores on Patient Outcomes.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The Model for End-stage Liver Disease and Sodium (MELD-Na) score was introduced for liver allocation in January 2016. We evaluated the effects of liver allocation, based on MELD-Na score, on waitlist and post-transplantation outcomes. METHODS: We examined 2 patient groups from the United Network for Organ Sharing registry; the MELD-period group was composed of patients who were registered as transplant candidates from June 18, 2013 through January 10, 2016 (n = 18,850) and the MELD-Na period group was composed of patients who were registered from January 11, 2016 through September 30, 2017 (n = 14,512). We compared waitlist and post-transplantation outcomes and association with serum sodium concentrations between groups. RESULTS: Mortality within 90 days on the liver waitlist decreased (hazard ratio [HR] 0.738, P < .001) and transplantation probability increased significantly (HR 1.217, P < .001) in the MELD-Na period. Although mild, moderate, and severe hyponatremia (130-134, 125-129, and <125 mmol/L) were independent risk factors for waitlist mortality in the MELD period (HR 1.354, 1.762, and 2.656; P < .001, P < .001, and P < .001, respectively) compared with the reference standard (135-145 mmol/L), these adverse outcomes were decreased in the MELD-Na period (HR 1.092, 1.271 and 1.374; P = .27, P = .018, and P = .037, respectively). The adjusted survival benefit of transplant recipients vs patients placed on the waitlist in the same score categories was definitive for patients with MELD-Na scores of 21-23 in the MELD-Na era (HR 0.336, P < .001) compared with MELD scores of 15-17 in the MELD era (HR 0.365, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Liver allocation based on MELD-Na score successfully improved waitlist outcomes and provided significant benefit to hyponatremic patients. Given the discrepancy in transplantation survival benefit, the current rules for liver allocation might require revision.