A Comprehensive Analysis of Litigation in Organ Transplantation for Allegations of Insufficient Policy Coverage, Discrimination and Malpractice.

Introduction: Transplantation is a field with unique medical and administrative challenges that involve an equally diverse array of stakeholders. Expectantly, the litigation stemming from this field should be similarly nuanced. There is a paucity of comprehensive reviews characterizing this medicolegal landscape. Design: The Caselaw Access Project Database was used to collect official court briefs of 2053 lawsuits related to kidney, liver, heart, lung, and pancreas transplantation. A thematic analysis was undertaken to characterize grounds for litigation, defendant type, and outcomes. Cases were grouped into policy, discrimination, poor or unsuccessful outcome, or other categories. Results: One hundred sixty-four court cases were included for analysis. Cases involving disputes over policy coverage were the most common across all organ types (N = 55, 33.5%). This was followed by poor outcomes (N = 51, 31.1%), allegations of discrimination against prison systems and employers (N = 37, 22.6%) and other (N = 21, 12.8%). Defendants involved in discrimination trials won with the greatest frequency (N = 29, 90.62%). Defendants implicated in policy suits won 65.3% (N = 32), poor outcomes 62.2% (N = 28), and other 70% (N = 14). Of the 51 cases involving poor outcomes, plaintiffs indicated lack of informed consent in 23 (45.1%). Conclusion: Reconsidering the informed consent process may be a viable means of mitigating future legal action. Most discrimination suits favoring defendants suggested previous concerns of structural injustices in transplantation may not be founded. The prevalence of policy-related cases could be an indication of financial burden on patients. Future work and advocacy will need to substantiate these concerns and address change where legal recourse falls short.

Cerebrovascular Disease Hospitalization Rates in End-Stage Kidney Disease Patients with Kidney Transplant and Peripheral Vascular Disease: Analysis Using the National Inpatient Sample (2005-2019).

Individuals with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) face higher cerebrovascular risk. Yet, the impact of peripheral vascular disease (PVD) and kidney transplantation (KTx) on hospitalization rates for cerebral infarction and hemorrhage remains underexplored. Analyzing 2,713,194 ESKD hospitalizations (2005-2019) using the National Inpatient Sample, we investigated hospitalization rates for ischemic and hemorrhagic cerebrovascular diseases concerning ESKD, PVD, KTx, or their combinations. Patients hospitalized with cerebral infarction due to thrombosis/embolism/occlusion (CITO) or artery occlusion resulting in cerebral ischemia (AOSI) had higher rates of comorbid ESKD and PVD (4.17% and 7.29%, respectively) versus non-CITO or AOSI hospitalizations (2.34%, p < 0.001; 2.29%, p < 0.001). Conversely, patients hospitalized with nontraumatic intracranial hemorrhage (NIH) had significantly lower rates of ESKD and PVD (1.64%) compared to non-NIH hospitalizations (2.34%, p < 0.001). Furthermore, hospitalizations for CITO or AOSI exhibited higher rates of KTx and PVD (0.17%, 0.09%, respectively) compared to non-CITO or AOSI hospitalizations (0.05%, p = 0.033; 0.05%, p = 0.002). Patients hospitalized with NIH showed similar rates of KTx and PVD (0.04%) versus non-NIH hospitalizations (0.05%, p = 0.34). This nationwide analysis reveals that PVD in ESKD patients is associated with increased hospitalization rates with cerebral ischemic events and reduced NIH events. Among KTx recipients, PVD correlated with increased hospitalizations for ischemic events, without affecting NIH. This highlights management concerns for patients with KTx and PVD.

Demographic inequities exist and influence transplant outcomes in liver transplantation for acute alcohol-associated hepatitis.

BACKGROUND: Liver transplantation has inherent disparities but data is scarce in liver transplant (LT) candidates with acute alcohol-associated hepatitis (AAH). We aimed to investigate demographic inequities and its impact on survival outcomes among AAH LT candidates. METHODS: A retrospective analysis using the United Network of Organ Sharing database was conducted between 2000 and 2021. 25 981 LT recipients with alcohol-associated liver cirrhosis and 662 recipients with AAH were included. Waitlisted candidates were also evaluated. RESULTS: In comparison with alcohol-associated liver cirrhosis, AAH LT recipients were more likely Asian or "other" race and younger. Hispanics demonstrated better graft and patient survival (p < 0.05) but were less likely to be waitlisted and transplanted for AAH than for liver cirrhosis. Women with AAH were more likely to be waitlisted and transplanted. Pre-existing diabetes and male sex were associated with higher graft failure (25% and 8% respectively). Increasing recipient age were 2% more likely to experience negative outcomes. Chronicity of liver disease did not impact graft (p = 0.137) or patient survival (p = 0.145). CONCLUSION: Our results revealed demographic factors have a significant impact on transplant listing, organ allocation and survival outcomes. Further investigations are imperative to minimize disparities in LT evaluation and provide equity in healthcare.

The disastrous business of presidential campaigns: The effect of disaster declarations on presidential elections in FEMA Region 3.

The issuance of disaster declarations has become a politicized matter. Prior research has demonstrated that presidents are more generous in awarding disaster relief in federal election years, and that there is a prevalence to award governors from the opposing political party. Additionally, voters tend to reward presidents seeking re-election to a greater degree for disaster response assistance rather than funding preparedness. The original research for this paper explores the impact of natural disasters on re-election rates and analyzes voter trends during presidential election years in Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Region 3 states for congruence with existing literature covering a national scope. Evaluations of the behaviors and (re)election margins of Presidents Bush and Obama are explored, and implications for President Trump's re-election effort are based on quantitative data and qualitative comparisons.