Browse
Submit Data
Databases
API
Help

Dataset Information

18 Views

0 Connections

0 Citations

0 Reanalyses

0 Downloads

Omics score: 0

Advantages and Limitations of Clinical Scores for Donation After Circulatory Death Liver Transplantation.

ABSTRACT: Background: Scoring systems have been proposed to select donation after circulatory death (DCD) donors and recipients for liver transplantation (LT). We hypothesized that complex scoring systems derived in large datasets might not predict outcomes locally. Methods: Based on 1-year DCD-LT graft survival predictors in multivariate logistic regression models, we designed, validated, and compared a simple index using the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) cohort (n = 136) and a universal-comprehensive (UC)-DCD score using the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) cohort (n = 5,792) to previously published DCD scoring systems. Results: The total warm ischemia time (WIT)-index included donor WIT (dWIT) and hepatectomy time (dHep). The UC-DCD score included dWIT, dHep, recipient on mechanical ventilation, transjugular-intrahepatic-portosystemic-shunt, cause of liver disease, model for end-stage liver disease, body mass index, donor/recipient age, and cold ischemia time. In the UNOS cohort, the UC-score outperformed all previously published scores in predicting DCD-LT graft survival (AUC: 0.635 vs. ≤0.562). In the UCSF cohort, the total WIT index successfully stratified survival and biliary complications, whereas other scores did not. Conclusion: DCD risk scores generated in large cohorts provide general guidance for safe recipient/donor selection, but they must be tailored based on non-/partially-modifiable local circumstances to expand DCD utilization.

SUBMITTER: Meier RPH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8766343 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Json Xml

Similar Datasets

The volume-outcomes relationship in donation after circulatory death liver transplantation.

Project description:BackgroundDonation after circulatory death (DCD) liver transplantation (LT) has become an effective mechanism for expanding the donor pool and decreasing waitlist mortality. However, it is unclear if low-volume DCD centers can achieve comparable outcomes to high-volume centers.MethodsFrom 2011 to 2019 utilizing the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) database, liver transplant centers were categorized into tertiles based on their annual volume of DCD LTs. Donor selection, recipient selection, and survival outcomes were compared between very-low volume (VLV, n = 1-2 DCD LTs per year), low-volume (LV, n = 3-5), and high-volume (HV, n > 5) centers.ResultsOne hundred and ten centers performed 3273 DCD LTs. VLV-centers performed 339 (10.4%), LV-centers performed 627 (19.2%), and HV-centers performed 2307 (70.4%) LTs. 30-day, 90-day, and 1-year patient and graft survival were significantly increased at HV-centers (all P < .05). Recipients at HV-centers had shorter waitlist durations (P < .01) and shorter hospital lengths of stay (P < .01). On multivariable regression, undergoing DCD LT at a VLV-center or LV-center was associated with increased 1-year patient mortality (VLV-OR:1.73, 1.12-2.69) (LV-OR: 1.42, 1.01-2.00) and 1-year graft failure (VLV-OR: 1.79, 1.24-2.58) (LV-OR: 1.28, .95-1.72).DiscussionIncreased annual DCD liver transplant volume is associated with improved patient and graft survival.

| S-EPMC9287056 | biostudies-literature

Addressing organ shortages: progress in donation after circulatory death for liver transplantation

Project description:Reducing wait list mortality among patients awaiting liver transplantation remains a substantial challenge because of organ shortage. In efforts to expand the donor pool there has been a trend toward increased use of donation after circulatory death (DCD) liver grafts. However, these marginal grafts are prone to higher complication rates, particularly biliary complications. In addition, many procured DCD livers are then deemed unsuitable for transplant. Despite these limitations, DCD grafts represent an important resource to address the current organ shortage, and as such there are research efforts directed toward improving the use of and outcomes for transplantation of these grafts. We review the current progress in DCD liver transplantation.

| S-EPMC7828961 | biostudies-literature

Donation after circulatory death donors in lung transplantation.

Project description:Transplantation of any organ into a recipient requires a donor. Lung transplant has a long history of an inadequate number of suitable donors to meet demand, leading to deaths on the waiting list annually since national data was collected, and strict listing criteria. Before the Uniform Determination of Death Act (UDDA), passed in 1980, legally defined brain death in the U.S., all donors for lung transplant came from sudden death victims [uncontrolled Donation after Circulatory Death donors (uDCDs)] in the recipient's hospital emergency department. After passage of the UDDA, uDCDs were abandoned to Donation after Brain Death donors (DBDs)-perhaps prematurely. Compared to livers and kidneys, many DBDs have lungs that are unsuitable for transplant, due to aspiration pneumonia, neurogenic pulmonary edema, trauma, and the effects of brain death on lung function. Another group of donors has become available-patients with a devastating irrecoverable brain injury that do not meet criteria for brain death. If a decision is made by next-of-kin (NOK) to withdraw life support and allow death to occur by asphyxiation, with NOK consent, these individuals can have organs recovered if death occurs relatively quickly after cessation of mechanical ventilation and maintenance of their airway. These are known as controlled Donation after Circulatory Death donors (cDCDs). For a variety of reasons, in the U.S., lungs are recovered from cDCDs at a much lower rate than kidneys and livers. Ex-vivo lung perfusion (EVLP) in the last decade has had a modest impact on increasing the number of lungs for transplant from DBDs, but may have had a larger impact on lungs from cDCDs, and may be indispensable for safe transplantation of lungs from uDCDs. In the next decade, DCDs may have a substantial impact on the number of lung transplants performed in the U.S. and around the world.

| S-EPMC8662509 | biostudies-literature

Should we reconsider lung transplantation through uncontrolled donation after circulatory death?

Project description:Lung transplantation through controlled donation after circulatory death (cDCD) has slowly gained universal acceptance with reports of equivalent outcomes to those through donation after brain death. In contrast, uncontrolled DCD (uDCD) lung use is controversial and requires ethical, legal and medical complexities to be addressed in a limited time. Consequently, uDCD lung use has not previously been reported in the United States. Despite these potential barriers, we present a case of a patient with multiple gunshot wounds to the head and the body who was unsuccessfully resuscitated and ultimately became an uDCD donor. A cytomegalovirus positive recipient who had previously consented for CDC high-risk, DCD and participation in the NOVEL trial was transplanted from this uDCD donor, following 3 h of ex vivo lung perfusion. The postoperative course was uneventful, and the recipient was discharged home on day 9. While this case represents a "best-case scenario," it illustrates a method for potential expansion of the lung allograft pool through uDCD after unsuccessful resuscitation in hospitalized patients.

| S-EPMC4273571 | biostudies-literature

Evolving utilization of donation after circulatory death livers in liver transplantation: The day of DCD has come.

Project description:Compared to donation after brain death (DBD), livers procured for transplantation from donation after circulatory death (DCD) donors experience more ischemia-reperfusion injury and higher rates of ischemic cholangiopathy due to the period of warm ischemic time (WIT) following withdrawal of life support. As a result, utilization of DCD livers for liver transplant (LT) has generally been limited to short WITs and younger aged donor grafts, causing many recovered DCD organs to be discarded without consideration for transplant. This study assesses how DCD liver utilization and outcomes have changed over time, using OPTN data from adult, first-time, deceased donor, whole-organ LTs between January 1995 and December 2019. Results show that increased clinical experience with DCD LT has translated into increased use of livers from DCD donors, shorter ischemic times, shorter lengths of hospitalization after transplant, and lower rates of retransplantation. The data also reveal that over the past decade, the rate of increase in DCD LTs conducted in the United States has outpaced that of DBD. Together, these trends signal an opportunity for the field of liver transplantation to mitigate the organ shortage by capitalizing on DCD liver allografts that are currently not being utilized.

| S-EPMC7969458 | biostudies-literature

A case of kidney transplantation using donation after circulatory death with renal calculi.

Project description:Donation after circulatory death (DCD) supplies a big percentage of the organ source pool. Compared to living-related donations, donor kidneys from DCD are commonly with lower quality since they inevitably suffer from hypoxia, hypotension, and inadequate organ perfusion during the progression to circulatory arrest. The current case presents a 44-year-old male donor with wide range subarachnoid hemorrhage and multiple skull fracture from a car accident. Multiple stones were detected in his right kidney. We performed a modified ex vivo pyelolithotomy and ureteroscopy on the bench to render a stone-free allograft. We also improved the donor kidney with hypothermic/perfusion preservation machine before renal transplantation. The recipient showed no complications during the first two-month post-operational follow-up. Such a donor kidney with stones may probably be discarded by conventional perspective. Yet, the combination of the ex vivo bench-surgery technique and hypothermic oxygenation/perfusion makes it a qualified donor kidney. Thus we have demonstrated a promising way of saving borderline qualified DCD donor kidneys.

| S-EPMC4724018 | biostudies-literature

Comparison of Biliary Complications Rates After Brain Death, Donation After Circulatory Death, and Living-Donor Liver Transplantation: A Single-Center Cohort Study.

Project description:Donation-after-circulatory-death (DCD), donation-after-brain-death (DBD), and living-donation (LD) are the three possible options for liver transplantation (LT), each with unique benefits and complication rates. We aimed to compare DCD-, DBD-, and LD-LT-specific graft survival and biliary complications (BC). We collected data on 138 DCD-, 3,027 DBD- and 318 LD-LTs adult recipients from a single center and analyzed patient/graft survival. BC (leak and anastomotic/non-anastomotic stricture (AS/NAS)) were analyzed in a subset of 414 patients. One-/five-year graft survival were 88.6%/70.0% for DCD-LT, 92.6%/79.9% for DBD-LT, and, 91.7%/82.9% for LD-LT. DCD-LTs had a 1.7-/1.3-fold adjusted risk of losing their graft compared to DBD-LT and LD-LT, respectively (p < 0.010/0.403). Bile leaks were present in 10.1% (DCD-LTs), 7.2% (DBD-LTs), and 36.2% (LD-LTs) (ORs, DBD/LD vs. DCD: 0.7/4.2, p = 0.402/<0.001). AS developed in 28.3% DCD-LTs, 18.1% DBD-LTs, and 43.5% LD-LTs (ORs, DBD/LD vs. DCD: 0.5/1.8, p = 0.018/0.006). NAS was present in 15.2% DCD-LTs, 1.4% DBDs-LT, and 4.3% LD-LTs (ORs, DBD/LD vs. DCD: 0.1/0.3, p = 0.001/0.005). LTs w/o BC had better liver graft survival compared to any other groups with BC. DCD-LT and LD-LT had excellent graft survival despite significantly higher BC rates compared to DBD-LT. DCD-LT represents a valid alternative whose importance should increase further with machine/perfusion systems.

| S-EPMC9780276 | biostudies-literature

Donation after circulatory death heart transplant.

Project description:Dr. O.P. Yadava, CEO and Chief Cardiac Surgeon, National Heart Institute, New Delhi, India, and Editor-in-Chief, Indian Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, in a conversation with Dr. Catherine Dushyant Sudarshan, discusses the state of donation after circulatory death for cardiac transplant and how it can address the donor shortages.

| S-EPMC7538526 | biostudies-literature

Hypothermic oxygenated machine perfusion promotes mitophagy flux against hypoxia ischemic injury in donation after circulatory death liver

Project description:HOPE is a dynamic preservation method to attenuate IRI in DCD liver. In a rat model of DCD liver, the protective mechanism of HOPE is probably by promoting mitophagy flux in response to hypoxia-ischemic injury. We performed gene expression profiling analysis using data obtained from RNA-seq of 4 different groups in DCD liver.

2022-10-15 | GSE215134 | GEO

Outcomes of transplantation of livers from donation after circulatory death donors in the UK: a cohort study.

Project description:ObjectivesOutcomes of liver transplantations from donation after circulatory death (DCD) donors may be inferior to those achieved with donation after brain death (DBD) donors. The impact of using DCD donors is likely to depend on specific national practices. We compared risk-adjusted graft loss and recipient mortality after transplantation of DCD and DBD livers in the UK.DesignProspective cohort study. Multivariable Cox regression and propensity score matching were used to estimate risk-adjusted HR.Setting7 liver transplant centres in the National Health Service (NHS) hospitals in England and Scotland.ParticipantsAdults who received a first elective liver transplant between January 2005 and December 2010 who were identified in the UK Liver Transplant Audit.InterventionsTransplantation of DCD and DBD livers.OutcomesGraft loss and recipient mortality.ResultsIn total, 2572 liver transplants were identified with 352 (14%) from DCD donors. 3-year graft loss (95% CI) was higher with DCD livers (27.3%, 21.8% to 33.9%) than with DBD livers (18.2%, 16.4% to 20.2%). After adjustment with regression, HR for graft loss was 2.3 (1.7 to 3.0). Similarly, 3-year mortality was higher with DCD livers (19.4%, 14.5% to 25.6%) than with DBD livers (14.1%, 12.5% to 16.0%) with an adjusted HR of 2.0 (1.4 to 2.8). Propensity score matching gave similar results. Centre-specific adjusted HRs for graft loss and recipient mortality seemed to differ among transplant centres, although statistical evidence is weak (p value for interaction 0.08 and 0.24, respectively).ConclusionsGraft loss and recipient mortality were about twice as high with DCD livers as with DBD livers in the UK. Outcomes after DCD liver transplantation may vary between centres. These results should inform policies for the use of DCD livers.

| S-EPMC3773642 | biostudies-literature

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

OmicsDI is an Elixir interoperability service. Learn more ›

Tweets

OmicsDI Databases

PRIDE
PeptideAtlas
MassIVE
JPOST Repository
Physiome Model Repository

EGA
EVA
ENA
LINCS
PAXDB
Cell Collective

MetaboLights
Metabolomics Workbench
MetabolomeExpress
GNPS
BioModels
FAIRDOMHub

ArrayExpress
dbGaP
ExpressionAtlas
GEO
NODE

Information

Databases
Help
API
Contact us
Code on GitHub
Terms of use
Submit Data