Effect of the opioid crisis on the liver transplantation donor pool: A national analysis.

BACKGROUND: Over the last decade there has been a surge in overdose deaths due to the opioid crisis. We sought to characterize the temporal change in overdose donor (OD) use in liver transplantation (LT), as well as associated post-LT outcomes, relative to the COVID-19 era. METHODS: LT candidates and donors listed between January 2016 and September 2022 were identified from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients database. Trends in LT donors and changes related to OD were assessed pre- versus post-COVID-19 (February 2020). RESULTS: Between 2016 and 2022, most counties in the United States experienced an increase in overdose-related deaths (n = 1284, 92.3%) with many counties (n = 458, 32.9%) having more than a doubling in drug overdose deaths. Concurrently, there was an 11.2% increase in overall donors, including a 41.7% increase in the number of donors who died from drug overdose. In pre-COVID-19 overdose was the 4th top mechanism of donor death, while in the post-COVID-19 era, overdose was the 2nd most common cause of donor death. OD was younger (OD: 35 yrs, IQR 29-43 vs. non-OD: 43 yrs, IQR 31-56), had lower body mass index (≥35 kg/cm2, OD: 31.2% vs. non-OD: 33.5%), and was more likely to be HCV+ (OD: 28.9% vs. non-OD: 5.4%) with lower total bilirubin (≥1.1 mg/dL, OD: 12.9% vs. non-OD: 20.1%) (all p < .001). Receipt of an OD was not associated with worse graft survival (HR .94, 95% CI .88-1.01, p = .09). CONCLUSIONS: Opioid deaths markedly increased following the COVID-19 pandemic, substantially altering the LT donor pool in the United States.

Liver transplantation access and outcomes: Impact of variations in liver-specific specialty care.

BACKGROUND: We sought to characterize the impact access to gastroenterologists/hepatologists has on liver transplantation listing, as well as time on the liver transplantation waitlist and post-transplant outcomes. METHODS: Liver transplantation registrants aged >18 years between January 1, 2004 and December 31, 2019 were identified from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients Standard Analytic Files. The liver transplantation registration ratio was defined as the ratio of liver transplant waitlist registrations in a given county per 1,000 liver-related deaths. RESULTS: A total of 150,679 liver transplantation registrants were included. Access to liver transplantation centers and liver-specific specialty physicians varied markedly throughout the United States. Of note, the liver transplantation registration ratio was lower in counties with poor access to liver-specific care versus counties with adequate access (poor access 137.2, interquartile range 117.8-163.2 vs adequate access 157.6, interquartile range 127.3-192.2, P < .001). Among patients referred for liver transplantation, the cumulative incidence of waitlist mortality and post-transplant graft survival was comparable among patients with poor versus adequate access to liver-specific care (both P > .05). Among liver transplantation recipients living in areas with poor access, after controlling for recipient and donor characteristics, cold ischemic time, and model for end-stage liver disease score, the area deprivation index predicted graft survival (referent, low area deprivation index; medium area deprivation index, hazard ratio 1.52, 95% confidence interval 1.03-12.23; high area deprivation index, 1.45, 95% confidence interval 1.01-12.09, both P < .05). CONCLUSION: Poor access to liver-specific care was associated with a reduction in liver transplantation registration, and individuals residing in counties with high social deprivation had worse graft survival among patients living in counties with poor access to liver-specific care.

Association of Neighborhood Deprivation and Transplant Center Quality with Liver Transplantation Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Social determinants of health can impact the quality of liver transplantation (LT) care. We sought to assess whether the association between neighborhood deprivation and transplant outcomes can be mitigated by receiving care at high-quality transplant centers. STUDY DESIGN: In this population-based cohort study, patients who underwent LT between 2004 and 2019 were identified in the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients. LT-recipient neighborhoods were identified at the county level and stratified into quintiles relative to Area Deprivation Index (ADI). Transplant center quality was based on the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients 5-tier ranking using standardized transplant rate ratios. Multivariable Cox regression was used to assess the relationship between ADI, hospital quality, and posttransplant survival. RESULTS: A total of 41,333 recipients (median age, 57.0 [50.0 to 63.0] years; 27,112 [65.4%] male) met inclusion criteria. Patients residing in the most deprived areas were more likely to have nonalcoholic steatohepatitis, be Black, and travel further distances to reach a transplant center. On multivariable analysis, post-LT long-term mortality was associated with low- vs high-quality transplant centers (hazard ratio [HR] 1.19, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.32), as well as among patients residing in high- vs low-ADI neighborhoods (HR 1.25, 95% CI 1.16 to 1.34; both p ≤ 0.001). Of note, individuals residing in high- vs low-ADI neighborhoods had a higher risk of long-term mortality after treatment at a low-quality (HR 1.31, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.62, p = 0.011) vs high-quality (HR 1.12, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.52, p = 0.471) LT center. CONCLUSIONS: LT at high-quality centers may be able to mitigate the association between posttransplant survival and neighborhood deprivation. Investments and initiatives that increase access to referrals to high-quality centers for patients residing in higher deprivation may lead to better outcomes and help mitigate disparities in LT.

Updates and Expert Opinions on Liver Transplantation for Gastrointestinal Malignancies.

Transplant oncology is a relatively new field in which transplantation is used to treat patients who would otherwise be unresectable. New anticancer treatment paradigms using tumor and transplant immunology and cancer immunogenomics are emerging. In turn, liver transplantation (LT) has become a potential therapy for certain patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) with liver metastasis, hepatocellular (HCC), cholangiocarcinoma (CCA), and metastatic neuroendocrine tumor (NET) of the liver. Although there are established criteria for LT in HCC, evidence regarding LT as a treatment modality for certain gastrointestinal malignancies is still debated. The aim of this review is to highlight updates in the role of LT for certain malignancies, including HCC, metastatic CRC, hilar CCA, and neuroendocrine tumor (NET), as well as contextualize LT use and discuss controversies in transplant oncology.

Outcomes After Deceased Donor Kidney Transplantation Using Kidney Allografts With Marginal Perfusion Parameters.

BACKGROUND: This study examines outcomes of deceased donor kidney transplantation (DDKT) in recipients of kidney allografts with marginal perfusion parameters. METHODS: Allografts with marginal perfusion parameters (resistance index [RI] >0.4 and pump flow rate [F] <70 mL/min; MP group) were compared with those with good parameters (RI <0.4 and F >70 mL/min; GP group) for DDKT recipients between January 1996 and November 2017 after hypothermic pulsatile perfusion. Demographics, creatinine, cold ischemia times (CIT), delayed graft function (DGF), and recipient glomerular filtration rate at pre- and post-transplant were noted. The primary outcome was graft survival post-transplant. RESULTS: In the MP (n = 31) versus GP (n = 1281) group, the median recipient was aged 57 years versus 51 years; the median donor was aged 47 versus 37 years; terminal creatinine was 0.9 versus 0.9 mg/dL; CIT was 10.2 versus 13 hours, and the RI and flow were 0.46 and 60 mL/min versus 0.21 and 120 mL/min. The DGF rate was 19% (MP) versus 8% (GP). The graft survival in the MP versus GP group was 81% versus 90% (1 year), 65% versus 79% (3 years), 65% versus 73% (4 years), and 45% versus 68% (5 years). CONCLUSION: Carefully selected kidney allografts after comprehensive donor and recipient evaluation may allow for the use of these routinely discarded kidneys with marginal perfusion parameters.

Patients are pragmatic and physicians are perfectionists? Comparing success after liver transplantation among patients and physicians.

Although both patients and physicians are key stakeholders in health care outcomes, patients and physicians often define success differently. The purpose of this study was to compare patient and physician perceptions of success 1 year after liver transplantation. This was a single-institution, qualitative study. We conducted in-person, semi-structured interviews with liver transplant recipients 1 year after transplantation and virtual interviews with transplant surgeons and hepatologists. Transcripts were coded and iteratively analyzed for themes using the principles of phenomenology. Twenty patients, 8 caregivers, 5 transplant surgeons, and 4 hepatologists were interviewed. Subject interviews averaged 57 (patient) and 27 (physician) minutes. Overall, patients and physicians had significant agreement in their definitions of success, which included avoidance of death, restoration of physical and mental function, return to society, acquisition of new health care knowledge, and open communication between the patient and the physician. Patients highlighted relief from worry about their future health status, and physicians highlighted decreased health care costs. Patients noted that a liver transplant did not have to be perfect, that is free from complications, to be successful. Physicians had a more stringent view and felt that any deviation from an ideal course reduced the relative success of a transplant. Detailed assessment of patient and physician responses reveals similar overall goals of regaining physical, mental, and emotional function. Complications are perceived differently by patients and physicians. Awareness of this discordance may serve to enhance relationships between transplant patients and their providers.

American Society of Transplant Surgeons recommendations on best practices in donation after circulatory death organ procurement.

The American Society of Transplant Surgeons supports efforts to increase the number of organs that are critically needed for patients desperately awaiting transplantation. In the United States, transplantation using organs procured from donation after circulatory death (DCD) donors has continued to increase in number. Despite these increases, substantial variability in the utilization and practices of DCD transplantation still exists. To improve DCD organ utilization, it is important to create a set of best practices for DCD recovery. The following recommendations aim to provide guidance on contemporary issues surrounding DCD organ procurement in the United States. A work group was composed of members of the American Society of Transplant Surgeon Scientific Studies Committee and the Thoracic Organ Transplantation Committee. The following topics were identified by the group either as controversial or lacking standardization: prewithdrawal preparation, definition of donor warm ischemia time, DCD surgical technique, combined thoracic and abdominal procurements, and normothermic regional perfusion. The proposed recommendations were classified on the basis of the grade of available evidence and the strength of the recommendation. This information should be valuable for transplant programs as well as for organ procurement organizations and donor hospitals as they develop robust DCD donor procurement protocols.

Kidney transplant from hepatitis C viremic donors into aviremic recipients and risk for post-transplant BK and cytomegalovirus infection.

BACKGROUND: kidney transplantation from Hepatitis C virus (HCV) viremic donors to uninfected recipients is associated with excellent short-term outcomes. However, HCV viremia might be associated with an increased risk for post-transplant viral complications. METHODS: We designed a retrospective study of HCV-negative kidney-only transplant recipients between 2018 and 2020. Recipients were grouped into group 1; HCV-negative donors, and group 2; HCV-viremic donors. Patients were matched 1:1 using propensity score. The primary objectives were to compare the incidence of cytomegalovirus (CMV) viremia ≥ 200 ml/IU, and BK viremia ≥1000 copies/ml between the groups. Secondary outcomes included group comparison of CMV disease, BK viremia ≥10 000 copies/ml, and 1-year patient and allograft survival. RESULTS: The study included 634 patients in group 1, and 71 patients in group 2. Sixty-five pairs of patients were matched. Incidence of CMV viremia (33.3% vs. 40.0%, p = .4675), and BK viremia (15.9% vs. 27.7%, p = .1353) did not differ significantly between groups in the matched cohort. Incidence of CMV disease (81.0% vs. 76.9%, p = 1.000), and BK viremia ≥10 000 copies/ml (9.5% vs. 16.9%, p = .2987) were comparable between groups. There was no difference in the 1-year patient or allograft survival between groups. CONCLUSION: kidney transplant from HCV-viremic donors is not associated with increased risk for BK or CMV viremia.

Spinal Stroke following Kidney Transplant.

Complications are a part of surgery. Spinal infarctions are a dreaded complication of aortic surgery. We present a patient who developed a spinal infarct after a kidney transplant. We were unable to find a causative factor in our search for etiology. In our review of the literature, we were unable to find a similar report. We present this case report to highlight a rare complication of kidney transplantation and to reinforce that patients requiring kidney transplant are complex patients with multiple comorbidities that can cause a multitude of complications in the periop period.

Hepatic Resection and Transplant in Glycogen Storage Diseases.

Patients with glycogen storage diseases pose unique management challenges to clinicians.These challenges are exacerbated wheneverthey undergo surgery as the basic anomaly in their glycogen storage pathways make them susceptible to organic acidosis, which may in turn complicate their preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative course. Because of the rarity of these diseases, clinicians may not be aware of the specific management concerns. In the case reported here, a 37-year-old patient with glycogen storage disease type 1 underwentleft hepatectomy for hepatic adenomatosis, which was complicated by intraoperative severe lactic acidosis that was successfully treated. After successful hepatectomy, the patient underwent liver transplant without major lactic acidosis or hemodynamic instability. Early recognition and aggressive management of blood sugar and lactic acidosis in patients with glycogen storage diseases can allow for successful outcomes even when complex surgical procedures are required.

Rescue Hepatectomy and Anhepatic Phase Management After Primary Nonfunction in a Liver Transplant.

Primary nonfunction is a rare but lethal complication that occurs in a small number of liver transplants. When primary nonfunction occurs, the only definite treatment is retransplant; however, another liver might not be readily available at that time. Hence, a surgeon should be aware of the various options available at hand for patient care during the time interval between the primary nonfunction and retransplant. Here, we describe the management strategy that was devised to take care of an unstable anhepatic patient in the intensive care unit, care of the patient during anhepatic phase, and successful outcome with a second liver transplant. Our index patient was a recipient of a liver donated after cardiac death. While in the operating room, after reperfusion of the liver, the patient had right heart dysfunction leading to hemodynamic instability and congestion of the liver, which culminated in primary nonfunction. Graft hepatectomy had to be done on postoperative day 1 because of deteriorating condition of the patient, and the patient was maintained in anhepatic phase in the intensive care unit for 27 hours.

Machine perfusion of kidney allografts affects early but not late graft function.

BACKGROUND: Hypothermic machine perfusion (HMP) parameters are influenced by donor variables which further affect recipient outcome. Interplay between these parameters can help to predict kidney performance on pump and the long term outcome. METHODS: All the kidneys transplanted at our center between May 2013 through November 2017 were included in the study. Donor and recipient data was obtained from internal database. Multiple logistic regression models with backward selection were used to determine significant donor and pump variables. RESULTS: Donor BMI, KDPI, age and donor sex had a significant association with pump flow. Donor sex, donor type, KDPI and age had significant effect on RI. Diastolic pressure and KDPI were significantly associated with DGF. Duration on pump, KDPI, flow, donor creatinine and type of donor were significantly associated with day 5 creatinine. KDPI was significantly associated with Day 365 creatinine. CONCLUSION: HMP effects early graft function while the long term function depends on donor parameters.

A real-world, single-center experience of the utilization of hepatitis C-viremic kidneys for hepatitis C-negative recipients.

The advent of direct-acting antiviral (DAA) therapies has allowed kidney transplantation from hepatitis C (HCV)-viremic donors into negative recipients. We evaluated the safety and feasibility of such practice when utilizing a patient's health plan to cover the cost for DAAs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a prospective, non-randomized, pilot clinical study. 30 HCV-negative participants received kidney transplant from HCV-viremic deceased donors. HCV polymerase chain reaction (PCR) was checked on day 3 post transplant, and a request for pan-genotypic DAA therapy was sent once viremia was confirmed. Primary outcomes were the percentage of patients achieving sustained virologic response defined as undetectable HCV PCR 12 weeks after therapy completion, and the percentage of patients receiving DAAs via patient's health plan. RESULTS: HCV viremia occurred in all 30 recipients. Sustained viral response was achieved in 93% of the patients. Two patients failed first-line DAAs, 1 patient due to non-compliance with the prescribed regimen while the other due to NS5A mutation. DAA therapy was successfully obtained via patient's health plan in 28/30 patients. There was no significant liver-related complication, patient death, or graft loss. CONCLUSION: Kidney transplantation from HCV-viremic donors appears to be safe. However, challenges with obtaining DAA coverage in the United States persist.

Donation After Circulatory Death Yields Survival Rates Similar to Donation After Brain Death Liver Transplant, Which Effectively Expands the Donor Pool.

OBJECTIVES: Liver allograft shortage has necessitated greater use of donations after circulatory death. Limited data are available to compare recipients' health care utilization for donation after circulatory death versus brain death. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Liver transplant data for our center from November 2016 until May 2019 were obtained (208 donations after brain death and 39 after circulatory death). We excluded patients <18 years old and multiorgan transplants; for cost data only, we also excluded retransplants. Primary outcome was recipients' health care utilization in donation after circulatory death versus brain death and included index admission length of stay, readmissions, and charges from transplant to 6 months. Secondary outcomes were patient and graft survival. RESULTS: Donors from circulatory death were younger than donors from brain death (median age 32 vs 40 years; P < .01). Recipient body mass index (31.23 vs 29.38 kg/m2), Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score (17 vs 19), portal vein thrombosis (15.8% vs 18.0%), length of stay (7 vs 8 days), and 30-, 90-, and 180-day posttransplant index admissions were not significantly different. Charges for index admission were equivalent for donation after circulatory death ($370771) and brain death ($374272) (P = .01). Charges for readmissions at 30 and 180 days were not significantly different (P = .80 and P = .19, respectively). Rates for graft failure (10.3% vs 4.8%; P = .08) and recipient death (10.3% vs 3.8%; P = .17) at 6 months posttransplant were similar. CONCLUSIONS: Donation after circulatory death versus brain death liver transplant recipients had similar lengths of stay and equivalent index admission charges. Graft and patient survival and charges from transplant to 6 months were similar. Donation after circulatory death liver allografts provide a safe, costequivalent donor pool expansion after careful donorrecipient selection.

Outcomes of hepatitis C virus seropositive donors to hepatitis C virus seronegative liver recipients: A large single center analysis.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: The success of direct-acting antivirals (DAA) has transformed the management of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection and has led to the expansion of the deceased donor organ pool for liver transplantation. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We present a single center retrospective review of liver transplantations performed on HCV-seronegative recipients from HCV-seropositive organs from 11/2017 to 05/2020. HCV nucleic acid testing (NAT) was performed on HCV-seropositive donors to assess active HCV infection. RESULTS: 42 HCV-seronegative recipients underwent a liver transplant from a HCV-seropositive donor, including 21 NAT negative (20 liver, 1 simultaneous liver kidney transplant) and 21 NAT positive liver transplants. Two (9.5%) HCV antibody positive/NAT negative recipients developed HCV viremia and achieved sustained virologic response with DAA therapy. The remaining patients with available data (19 patients) remained polymerase chain reaction (PCR) negative at 6 months. 20 (95%) of HCV antibody positive/NAT positive recipients had a confirmed HCV viremia. 100% of patients with available data (15 patients) achieved SVR. Observed events include 1 mortality and graft loss and equivalent rates of post-transplant complications between NAT positive and NAT negative recipients. CONCLUSIONS: HCV-seropositive organs can be safely transplanted into HCV-seronegative patients with minimal complications post-transplant.

The impact of donor and recipient diabetes on renal transplant outcomes.

The use of diabetic kidneys is increasing worldwide with better outcome than being on waitlist and possible reversal of diabetic changes in transplanted kidneys. But particular caution is warranted in diabetic donor-recipient combination. Total 1223 deceased donor kidney transplants were performed at our center between 2008 and 2018. 689 from non-diabetic donor (NDD) to non-diabetic recipient, 400 from non-diabetic donor to diabetic recipient, 97 from diabetic to non-diabetic recipient, and 32 from diabetic donor (DD) to diabetic recipient. The DD was older than NDDs (median age 48 vs 39 years, P < 0.0001). DD had higher BMI (35.6 vs 26.9, P < 0.0001), higher KDPI (74% vs 37%, P < 0.0001), and higher terminal creatinine (1.10 mg/dl vs 0.95 mg/dl, p 0.0046) than the NDD. Diabetes recipients were comparatively older (57 vs 54, P < 0.001). DD recipients had higher serum creatinine at 6 months (1.70 vs 1.50 mg/dl, p 0.00304) and 2 years post-transplant (1.70 vs 1.50 mg/dl P < 0.0002). DD recipients had more favorable end CPRA than NDD recipients (77.5% at 0% vs 67.4% at 0, P = 0.0074). Ten-year patient and graft survival was best in NDD-recipient pair and worse in DD-recipient pair. Diabetic donor kidneys to diabetic recipients have lower 1-, 3-, and 5-year graft survival.

Techniques for Management of Portal Vein Thrombosis during Liver Transplantation.

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) poses a unique challenge in liver transplant. The management of PVT differs according to the extent of thrombosis. Anastomosis of a donor portal vein to a varix is a viable option when an adequate size varix is identified on preoperative imaging or intraoperatively. Here, we describe our experience in two liver transplant cases with cavernous transformation of the portal vein where the donor portal vein was anastomosed to a varix using a donor iliac vein interposition graft.

Redesigning a Department of Surgery during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has created an urgent need for reorganization and surge planning among departments of surgery across the USA. METHODS: Review of the COVID-19 planning process and work products in preparation for a patient surge. Organizational and process changes, workflow redesign, and communication plans are presented. RESULTS: The planning process included widespread collaboration among leadership from many disciplines. The department of surgery played a leading role in establishing clinical protocols, guidelines, and policies in preparation for a surge of COVID-19 patients. A multidisciplinary approach with input from clinical and nonclinical stakeholders is critical to successful crisis planning. A clear communication plan should be implemented early and input from trainees, staff, and faculty should be solicited. CONCLUSION: Major departmental and health system reorganization is required to adapt academic surgical practices to a widespread crisis. Surgical leadership, innovation, and flexibility are critical to successful planning and implementation.

Inverse Association Between the Quantity of Human Peripheral Blood CXCR5+IFN-γ+CD8+ T Cells With De Novo DSA Production in the First Year After Kidney Transplant.

BACKGROUND: We recently reported that a novel CXCR5IFN-γCD8 T-cell subset significantly inhibits posttransplant alloantibody production in a murine transplant model. These findings prompted the current study to investigate the association of human CD8 T cells with the same phenotype with the development of de novo donor-specific antibody (DSA) after kidney transplantation. METHODS: In the current studies, we prospectively and serially analyzed peripheral blood CD8 and CD4 T-cell subsets and monitored for the development of de novo DSA in kidney transplant recipients during the first-year posttransplant. We report results on 95 first-time human kidney transplant recipients with 1-year follow-up. RESULTS: Twenty-three recipients (24.2%) developed de novo DSA within 1-year posttransplant. Recipients who developed DSA had significantly lower quantities of peripheral CXCR5IFN-γCD8 T cells (P = 0.01) and significantly lower ratios of CXCR5IFN-γCD8 T cell to combined CD4 Th1/Th2 cell subsets (IFN-γCD4 and IL-4CD4 cells; P = 0.0001) compared to recipients who remained DSA-negative over the first-year posttransplant. CONCLUSIONS: Our data raise the possibility that human CXCR5IFN-γCD8 T cells are a homolog to murine CXCR5IFN-γCD8 T cells (termed antibody-suppressor CD8 T cells) and that the quantity of CXCR5IFN-γCD8 T cells (or the ratio of CXCR5IFN-γCD8 T cells to Th1/Th2 CD4 T cells) may identify recipients at risk for development of DSA.