Dataset Information

Facilitating access to the renal transplant waiting list does not increase the number of transplantations: comparative study of two French regions.

ABSTRACT:

Background

In France, there are important regional disparities of access to the renal transplant waiting list and transplantation. Our objectives were to compare the characteristics of patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) of two French regions (Ile-de-France and Bretagne) and to identify determinants of access to the waiting list and subsequent transplantation, with a focus on temporary inactive status (TIS) periods.

Methods

All 18-80-year-old incident patients who started dialysis in Ile-de-France or Bretagne between 2006 and 2009 were included (n = 6160). Associations between patients' characteristics and placement on the waiting list or transplantation were assessed using a Fine and Gray model to take into account the competing risk of death and living donor transplantation.

Results

At the end of the follow-up (31 December 2013), more patients had undergone transplantation in Bretagne than in Ile-de-France (30 versus 27%), although the percentage of waitlisted patients was higher in Ile-de-France than in Bretagne (47 versus 33%). More patients were on TIS and with a longer median TIS duration in Ile-de-France. Independent of age and clinical characteristics, patients in Bretagne were less likely to be waitlisted than those in Ile-de-France [subdistribution hazard ratio 0.77 (95% confidence interval 0.7-0.9)]. After waitlisting, patients in Bretagne were four times more likely to be transplanted.

Conclusions

Our study highlights clinical practice differences in Bretagne and Ile-de-France and shows that facilitating access to the waiting list is not sufficient to improve access to renal transplantation, which also depends on organ availability.

SUBMITTER: Lefort M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5162409 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Facilitating access to the renal transplant waiting list does not increase the number of transplantations: comparative study of two French regions.

Lefort Mathilde M Vigneau Cécile C Laurent Annelen A Lebbah Saïd S Le Meur Nolwenn N Jais Jean-Philippe JP Daugas Eric E Bayat Sahar S

Clinical kidney journal 20160909 6

<h4>Background</h4>In France, there are important regional disparities of access to the renal transplant waiting list and transplantation. Our objectives were to compare the characteristics of patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) of two French regions (Ile-de-France and Bretagne) and to identify determinants of access to the waiting list and subsequent transplantation, with a focus on temporary inactive status (TIS) periods.<h4>Methods</h4>All 18-80-year-old incident patients who started ...[more]

PMID: 27994866

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceWith continuing improvements in medical devices and more than a decade since the 2006 United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) allocation policy, it is pertinent to assess survival among patients on the heart transplantation waiting list, especially given the recently approved 2018 UNOS allocation policy.ObjectivesTo assess survival outcomes among patients on the heart transplant waiting list during the past 3 decades and to examine the association of ventricular assist devices (VADs) and the 2006 UNOS allocation policy with survival.Design, setting, and participantsA retrospective cross-sectional used the UNOS database to perform an analysis of 95 323 candidates wait-listed for heart transplantation between January 1, 1987, and December 29, 2017. Candidates for all types of combined transplants were excluded (n = 2087). Patients were followed up from the time of listing to death, transplantation, or removal from the list due to clinical improvement. Competing-risk, Kaplan-Meier, and multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression analyses were used.Main outcomes and measuresThe analysis involved an unadjusted and adjusted survival analysis in which the primary outcome was death on the waiting list. Because of changing waiting list preferences and policies during the study period, the intrinsic risk of death for wait-listed candidates was assessed by individually analyzing, comparing, and adjusting for several candidate risk factors.ResultsIn total, 95 323 candidates (72 915 men [76.5%]; mean [SD] age, 51.9 [12.0] years) were studied. In the setting of changes in listing preferences, 1-year survival on the waiting list increased from 34.1% in 1987-1990 to 67.8% in 2011-2017 (difference in proportions, 0.34%; 95% CI, 0.32%-0.36%; P < .001). The 1-year waiting list survival for candidates with VADs increased from 10.2% in 1996-2000 to 70.0% in 2011-2017 (difference in proportions, 0.60%; 95% CI, 0.58%-0.62%; P < .001). Similarly, in the setting of changing mechanical circulatory support indications, the 1-year waiting list survival for patients without VADs increased from 53.9% in 1996-2000 to 66.5% in 2011-2017 (difference in proportions, 0.13%; 95% CI, 0.12%-0.14%; P < .001). In the decade prior to the 2006 UNOS allocation policy, the 1-year waiting list survival was 51.1%, while in the decade after it was 63.9% (difference in proportions, 0.13%; 95% CI, 0.12%-0.14%; P < .001). In adjusted analysis, each time period after 1987-1990 had a marked decrease in waiting list mortality.Conclusions and relevanceThis study found temporally associated increases in heart transplant waiting list survival for all patient groups (with or without VADs, UNOS status 1 and status 2 candidates, and candidates with poor functional status).

Project description:Rationale: Referrals for lung transplant and transplant rates in the United States are lower than in Canada for patients with advanced cystic fibrosis (CF) lung disease. Further study of factors limiting access are needed to optimize referral and transplant for this population.Objectives: To determine the effect of socioeconomic position, while accounting for disease severity, on the likelihood of wait-listing for lung transplant in the United States.Methods: A case-control study of 3,110 patients (1,555 wait-listed, 1,555 never wait-listed) in the linked CF Foundation Patient Registry/Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients was performed with 1:1 matching for age, forced expiratory volume in 1 second, and year. Logistic regression was performed with univariate and multivariate analyses accounting for eight clinical factors (sex, oxygen use, body mass index, hemoptysis, forced vital capacity, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and i.v. antibiotic days) and six socioeconomic factors (race, marital status, education, health insurance, median zip code income, and distance to transplant program). The CF Health Score and Socioeconomic Barrier Score were created based on summation of variables. Interactions between scores were calculated.Results: We found an inverse relationship between the probability of wait-listing and CF Health Score and Socioeconomic Barrier Score. As the CF Health Score decreased (less healthy), the probability of wait-listing increased by 69.3% from a score of 7 to 2. As the Socioeconomic Barrier Score decreased (fewer barriers), the probability of wait-listing increased by 31.7% from a score of ≥5 to 1). Regardless of illness severity, socioeconomic barriers presented an impediment to wait-listing. Individuals with higher Socioeconomic Barrier Scores accessed transplant about half as often as those with lower scores at the same level of medical severity. Analysis of interactions demonstrated a higher probability of wait-listing for individuals with moderate health severity and fewer social barriers compared with sicker individuals with more socioeconomic barriers.Conclusions: Accrual of socioeconomic barriers limits access to lung transplant irrespective of disease severity, a finding of substantial concern for patients with CF and for transplant providers. Future interventions can focus on this at-risk population early in the disease course.

Project description:Under the current liver-transplantation policy, donor organs are offered to patients with the highest risk of death.Using data derived from all adult candidates for primary liver transplantation who were registered with the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network in 2005 and 2006, we developed and validated a multivariable survival model to predict mortality at 90 days after registration. The predictor variable was the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score with and without the addition of the serum sodium concentration. The MELD score (on a scale of 6 to 40, with higher values indicating more severe disease) is calculated on the basis of the serum bilirubin and creatinine concentrations and the international normalized ratio for the prothrombin time.In 2005, there were 6769 registrants, including 1781 who underwent liver transplantation and 422 who died within 90 days after registration on the waiting list. Both the MELD score and the serum sodium concentration were significantly associated with mortality (hazard ratio for death, 1.21 per MELD point and 1.05 per 1-unit decrease in the serum sodium concentration for values between 125 and 140 mmol per liter; P<0.001 for both variables). Furthermore, a significant interaction was found between the MELD score and the serum sodium concentration, indicating that the effect of the serum sodium concentration was greater in patients with a low MELD score. When applied to the data from 2006, when 477 patients died within 3 months after registration on the waiting list, the combination of the MELD score and the serum sodium concentration was considerably higher than the MELD score alone in 32 patients who died (7%). Thus, assignment of priority according to the MELD score combined with the serum sodium concentration might have resulted in transplantation and prevented death.This population-wide study shows that the MELD score and the serum sodium concentration are important predictors of survival among candidates for liver transplantation.

Project description:ImportanceAllocation of deceased donor kidneys is meant to follow a ranked match-run list of eligible candidates, but transplant centers with a 1-to-1 relationship with their local organ procurement organization have full discretion to decline offers for higher-priority candidates and accept them for lower-ranked candidates at their center.ObjectiveTo describe the practice and frequency of transplant centers placing deceased donor kidneys with candidates who are not the highest rank at their center according to the allocation algorithm.Design, setting, and participantsThis retrospective cohort study used 2015 to 2019 organ offer data from US transplant centers with a 1-to-1 relationship with their local organ procurement organization, following candidates for transplant events from January 2015 to December 2019. Participants were deceased kidney donors with a single match-run and at least 1 kidney transplanted locally and adult, first-time, kidney-only transplant candidates receiving at least 1 offer for a locally transplanted deceased donor kidney. Data were analyzed from March 1, 2022 to March 28, 2023.ExposureDemographic and clinical characteristics of donors and recipients.Main outcomes and measuresThe outcome of interest was kidney transplantation into the highest-priority candidate (defined as transplanted after zero declines for local candidates in the match-run) vs a lower-ranked candidate.ResultsThis study assessed 26 579 organ offers from 3136 donors (median [IQR] age, 38 [25-51] years; 2903 [62%] men) to 4668 recipients. Transplant centers skipped their highest-ranked candidate to place kidneys further down the match-run for 3169 kidneys (68%). These kidneys went to a median (IQR) of the fourth- (third- to eighth-) ranked candidate. Higher kidney donor profile index (KDPI; higher score indicates lower quality) kidneys were less likely to go to the highest-ranked candidate, with 24% of kidneys with KDPI of at least 85% going to the top-ranked candidate vs 44% of KDPI 0% to 20% kidneys. When comparing estimated posttransplant survival (EPTS) scores between the skipped candidates and the ultimate recipients, kidneys were placed with recipients with both better and worse EPTS than the skipped candidates, across all KDPI risk groups.Conclusions and relevanceIn this cohort study of local kidney allocation at isolated transplant centers, we found that centers frequently skipped their highest-priority candidates to place kidneys further down the allocation prioritization list, often citing organ quality concerns but placing kidneys with recipients with both better and worse EPTS with nearly equal frequency. This occurred with limited transparency and highlights the opportunity to improve the matching and offer algorithm to improve allocation efficiency.

Dataset Information

Facilitating access to the renal transplant waiting list does not increase the number of transplantations: comparative study of two French regions.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Facilitating access to the renal transplant waiting list does not increase the number of transplantations: comparative study of two French regions.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets