Dataset Information

The Impact of Center Volume on Outcomes in Lung Transplantation.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Studies in lung transplantation have shown variable association between hospital volume and clinical outcomes. We aimed to identify the pattern of effect of hospital volume on individual patient survival after lung transplantation.

Methods

We performed a retrospective analysis using the United Network for Organ Sharing national thoracic organ transplantation database. Adult patients who underwent lung transplantation between January 2013 and December 2017 were included. The association between mean annual center volume and 1-year overall survival was examined using restricted cubic splines in a random effects multivariable Cox model. The volume threshold for optimal 1-year overall survival was subsequently approximated by the maximum likelihood approach using segmented linear splines in the same model.

Results

The study included 10,007 patients at 71 transplant centers. Median annual center volume was 22 cases (interquartile range, 10.6 to 38). A center volume threshold was identified at 33 cases per year (95% confidence interval, 28 to 37). Higher center volume, to 33 cases per year, was associated with better 1-year survival (hazard ratio 0.989, 95% confidence interval, 0.980 to 0.999 every additional case). Further increase in center volume above 33 cases per year showed no additional benefit (hazard ratio 1.000, 95% confidence interval, 0.996 to 1.003 every additional case). Twenty-three centers (32.4%) reached the volume threshold of 33 cases per year.

Conclusions

One-year survival after lung transplantation improved with increasing center volume to as many as 33 cases per year. Low volume centers below the 33 cases per year threshold had large variations in their outcomes and had a higher risk of performing poorly, although many of them maintained good performance.

SUBMITTER: Yang Z

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8505551 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The Impact of Center Volume on Outcomes in Lung Transplantation.

Yang Zhizhou Z Subramanian Melanie P MP Yan Yan Y Meyers Bryan F BF Kozower Benjamin D BD Patterson G Alexander GA Nava Ruben G RG Hachem Ramsey R RR Witt Chad A CA Pasque Michael K MK Byers Derek E DE Kulkarni Hrishikesh S HS Kreisel Daniel D Itoh Akinobu A Puri Varun V

The Annals of thoracic surgery 20210420 3

<h4>Background</h4>Studies in lung transplantation have shown variable association between hospital volume and clinical outcomes. We aimed to identify the pattern of effect of hospital volume on individual patient survival after lung transplantation.<h4>Methods</h4>We performed a retrospective analysis using the United Network for Organ Sharing national thoracic organ transplantation database. Adult patients who underwent lung transplantation between January 2013 and December 2017 were included. ...[more]

PMID: 33857492

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPrevious studies in the field of organ transplantation have shown a possible association between nighttime surgery and adverse outcomes. We aim to determine the impact of nighttime lung transplantation on postoperative outcomes, long-term survival, and overall cost.MethodsWe performed a single-center retrospective cohort analysis of adult lung transplant recipients who underwent transplantation between January 2006 and December 2017. Data were extracted from our institutional Lung Transplant Registry and Mid-America Transplant services database. Patients were classified into 2 strata, daytime (5 AM to 6 PM) and nighttime (6 PM to 5 AM), based on time of incision. Major postoperative adverse events, 5-year overall survival, and 5-year bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome-free survival were examined after propensity score matching. Additionally we compared overall cost of transplantation between nighttime and daytime groups.ResultsOf the 740 patients included in this study, 549 (74.2%) underwent daytime transplantation and 191 (25.8%) underwent nighttime transplantation (NT). Propensity score matching yielded 187 matched pairs. NT was associated with a higher risk of having any major postoperative adverse event (adjusted odds ratio, 1.731; 95% confidence interval, 1.093-2.741; P = .019), decreased 5-year overall survival (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.798; 95% confidence interval, 1.079-2.995; P = .024), and decreased 5-year bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome-free survival (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.556; 95% confidence interval, 1.098-2.205; P = .013) in doubly robust multivariable analyses after propensity score matching. Overall cost for NT and daytime transplantation was similar.ConclusionsNT was associated with a higher risk of major postoperative adverse events, decreased 5-year overall survival, and decreased 5-year bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome-free survival. Our findings suggest potential benefits of delaying NT to daytime transplantation.

Project description:Background:Kidney transplantation is the optimal treatment for patients with end-stage renal disease; however, long-term outcomes remain suboptimal. Objective:The objectives of our study were to examine the variation in survival rates and determine whether center volume and case mix are associated with transplant outcomes and explain the variation across kidney transplant centers in Ontario, Canada. Design:This was a population-based cohort study using health care administrative databases. Setting:A total of 5 transplant centers across Ontario, Canada. Patients:We included adults (?18 years) undergoing primary, solitary kidney transplantation between January 1, 2000 to December 31, 2013. Measurements:The co-primary outcomes were death-censored graft loss and total mortality. Methods:Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression was used to assess potential associations and describe variation, using hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for each center relative to the average across all centers. Results:The study cohort included 5037 patients followed for a median of 5.3 years, interquartile range (2.7-8.6). In multivariable models, recipient age, body mass index, Charlson Index, time on dialysis, donor type, and age were found to be significantly associated with death-censored graft loss, and recipient age and sex, Charlson Index, time on dialysis, donor age, and time era of transplant were associated with total mortality. There was statistically significant variation across centers observed for death-censored graft loss (P = .04) with HRs ranging from 0.72 to 1.22. However, neither adjusting for case mix nor center volume meaningfully changed the HRs reflecting each center-specific effect. There was a tendency toward reduced risk of graft loss (HR, per additional 25 patients, 0.90 [95% CI, 0.78-1.04]) in centers with higher volumes. For total mortality, there was statistically significant variation across centers with HRs ranging from 0.82 to 1.13 (P = .04); however, neither adjusting for case mix or center volume meaningfully changed the HRs. Center volume was not significantly associated with total mortality (HR, per additional 25 patients, 1.04 [95% CI, 0.90-1.20]). Limitations:This study was limited by the small number of centers included. Conclusions:Outcomes differ across the 5 transplant centers in Ontario. We did not find any strong support for our hypotheses that case mix or center volume is responsible for these differences.

Project description:ObjectivesThis study examined patient outcomes after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation across a range of center surgical volumes.BackgroundIn order for a center to qualify for reimbursement, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) requires it to implant ≥10 LVADs or total artificial hearts over a 3-year period. The impact of center LVAD surgical volumes on patient outcomes has not been thoroughly scrutinized.MethodsCenter volumes were provided for 7,416 patients undergoing LVAD implantation who were enrolled in INTERMACS (Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support). Center LVAD volume was categorized as either very low (≤10 implants/year, n = 617), low (11 to 30 implants/year, n = 2,561), medium (31 to 50 implants/year, n = 2,458), or high (>50 implants/year, n = 1,750). The main outcome of interest was patient survival based on center volume derived from Kaplan-Meier and multivariate Cox regression.ResultsOverall survival was associated with center volume (p = 0.003), as follows: 71 ± 1.8% (very low volume), 81 ± 0.8% (low volume), 83 ± 0.8% (medium volume), and 79 ± 1.0% (high volume) at 1 year. Compared with medium volume centers, the 90-day mortality was higher in very low volume (odds ratio [OR]: 1.35; p = 0.04) and high volume (OR: 1.28; p = 0.018) VAD centers. The adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for mortality were 1.32 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.11 to 1.56), 1.07 (95% CI: 0.95 to 1.21), and 1.17 (95% CI: 1.03 to 1.30) for very low, low, and high volume centers, respectively. Center volume did not predict mortality (p = 0.25; n = 3,688) in INTERMACS profile 1 patients (patients who had sustained cardiogenic shock) and profile 2 patients (patients with progressive hemodynamic decline despite inotropes).ConclusionsCenter volume correlates with post-VAD survival, with worse survival noted at very-low volume centers. These findings suggest that current U.S. VAD center standards warrant reconsideration.

Project description:In the United States, livers for transplantation are distributed within donation service areas (DSAs). In DSAs with multiple transplant centers, competition among centers for organs and recipients may affect recipient selection and outcomes in comparison with DSAs with only 1 center. The objective of this study was to determine whether competition within a DSA is associated with posttransplant outcomes and variations in patients wait-listed within the DSA. United Network for Organ Sharing data for 38,385 adult cadaveric liver transplant recipients undergoing transplantation between January 1, 2003 and December 31, 2009 were analyzed to assess differences in liver recipients and donors and in posttransplant survival by competition among centers. The main outcome measures that were studied were patient characteristics, actual and risk-adjusted graft and patient survival rates after transplantation, organ quality as quantified by the donor risk index (DRI), wait-listed patients per million population by DSA, and competition as quantified by the Hirschman-Herfindahl index (HHI). Centers were stratified by HHI levels as no competition or as low, medium (or mid), or high competition. In comparison with DSAs without competition, the low-, mid-, and high-competition DSAs (1) performed transplantation for patients with a higher risk of graft failure [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.24, HR = 1.26, and HR = 1.34 (P < 0.001 for each)] and a higher risk of death [HR = 1.21, HR = 1.23, and HR = 1.34 (P < 0.001 for each)] and for a higher proportion of sicker patients as quantified by the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score [10.0% versus 14.8%, 20.1%, and 28.2% with a match MELD score of 31-40 (P < 0.001 for each comparison)], (2) were more likely to use organs in the highest risk quartile as quantified by the DRI [18.3% versus 27.6%, 20.4%, and 31.7% (P ? 0.001 for each)], and (3) listed more patients per million population [18 (median) versus 34 (P = not significant), 37 (P = 0.005), and 45 (P = 0.0075)]. Significant variability in patient selection for transplantation is associated with market variables characterizing competition among centers. These findings suggest both positive and negative effects of competition among health care providers.

Project description:Background:There is a low utilization rate of donated donor lungs. Historically, transplantation of lungs from hepatitis C-viremic donors to hepatitis C (HCV) negative recipients was avoided due to concern for worse graft survival. In the past few years with the advent of direct acting antiviral (DAA) therapy, there are emerging data suggesting the safety and efficacy of transplanting thoracic organs from HCV-viremic donors. This study assessed the differences in donor characteristics and allograft-specific clinical features at the time of organ offer and investigated whether these variables differed in HCV-viremic versus HCV-negative donors and impacted recipient outcomes. Methods:We conducted a single-center, retrospective cohort study of adult patients who underwent a lung transplant at Brigham and Women's Hospital between March 2017 and October 2018. Patients were stratified based on their donor HCV status (HCV-viremic versus HCV-negative). Donor and allograft-specific characteristics and clinical features including chest imaging and bronchoscopy reports, respiratory cultures, and the donor's oxygenation as measured by the arterial partial pressure of oxygen (PaO2) were collected as well as recipient baseline characteristics and transplant outcomes. Results:During the study period, 42 and 57 lung transplants were performed from HCV-viremic and HCV-negative donors, respectively. Donor age was similar in both cohorts. More HCV-viremic donors died from drug intoxication (71% versus 19%, P=0.0001) and had a history of cigarette use (83% versus 5%, P=0.0001) and drug use (76% versus 49%, P=0.007). There were differences in the baseline recipient characteristics including a lower median lung allocation score in the HCV-viremic cohort. The organ-specific clinical characteristics including the terminal PaO2, chest imaging and bronchoscopy findings, and evidence of pulmonary infection were similar between the two cohorts. The recipient outcomes overall were excellent and did not differ significantly in both cohorts in terms of graft and patient survival at 6 and 12 months. Conclusions:Despite a greater proportion of HCV-viremic donors being increased risk with a history of drug and cigarette use and having died as a result of drug intoxication, the quality of the HCV-viremic donor organs did not differ from the HCV-negative donor organs or impact graft and recipient survival. Due to an increasing number of transplants from increased risk donors and in order to develop safe and effective protocols to perform lung transplants from HCV-infected donors, further characterization of the donor and allograft-specific clinical features and longer-term recipient outcomes is greatly needed.

Dataset Information

The Impact of Center Volume on Outcomes in Lung Transplantation.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

The Impact of Center Volume on Outcomes in Lung Transplantation.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets