Acuity circles allocation policy impact on waitlist mortality and donation after circulatory death liver transplantation: A nationwide retrospective analysis
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Giorgakis E
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9892027 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Feb
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
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
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
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
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
Project description:BackgroundDonation after circulatory death (DCD) with cardiopulmonary bypass for thoracoabdominal normothermic regional perfusion (TA-NRP) has led to increased use of donor hearts. Rejection rates and long-term survival outcomes are not known.MethodsA single-center retrospective cohort review of patients who underwent DCD heart transplantation from January 2020 to December 2023 was performed. Donor and recipient characteristics, operative characteristics, and posttransplantation outcomes were analyzed. Subgroup analysis comparing co-localized vs distant donors and recipients was performed. The primary end point was 1-year survival. Secondary end points included incidences of primary graft dysfunction (PGD), cardiac allograft vasculopathy (CAV), rejection rate, and overall mortality. Our TA-NRP protocol has remained the same, consisting of sternotomy, ligation of aortic arch vessels, establishment of cardiopulmonary bypass, reintubation, resuscitation of the heart, and cold static storage during transport.ResultsIn total, 32 recipients underwent DCD heart transplantation, including 26 isolated hearts, 3 heart-lungs, and 3 heart-kidneys. The median age was 56 years for recipients and 39 years for donors; 21 donors and recipients were co-localized, whereas 11 were distant. One-year survival was 100%. Two patients required mechanical circulatory support for PGD. Four patients experienced grade 2R acute cellular rejection. Five patients had grade 1 CAV at 1 year. On subgroup analysis, distant donors and recipients had longer warm (47 vs 30 minutes; P < .005) and cold (213 vs 76 minutes; P < .005) ischemia times, without any other differences.ConclusionsOutcomes after DCD heart transplantation using TA-NRP remain encouraging with acceptable rates of rejection, PGD, CAV, and survival at 1 year.
| S-EPMC11910781 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundHeart failure remains a significant cause of morbidity and mortality internationally. With significant disparities in supply and demand for donor organs and recipients, there has been a growing need to expand the donor pool. Donation after circulatory death (DCD) heart transplantation offers such a method, with ex-situ machine perfusion (ESMP) and thoracoabdominal normothermic reperfusion (NRP) offering two potential methods of procuring DCD organs. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to evaluate the current literature and compare DCD with donation after brain death (DBD) as well as DCD methods of transplantation.MethodsA systematic literature review was performed according to PRISMA guidelines. Primary outcomes were 30-day, 6- and 12-month survival, as well as primary graft dysfunction (PGD) and acute rejection. Secondary outcomes were length of stay (LOS), intensive care unit (ICU) LOS and temporary dialysis. Weighted averages were utilised to summarise data with funnel plots utilised for comparisons. Reconstructed Kaplan-Meier curves were utilised to evaluate mid-term survival.ResultsA total of 10 studies were included evaluating 923 DCD recipients and 7,236 DBD recipients. Survival for DCD and DBD patients at 6 months was 93% and 91% respectively [odds ratio (OR), 1.5; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.0-2.2; P<0.05] and at 12 months 93% and 91% for DCD and DBD respectively (OR 0.77, 95% CI: 0.1-5.3, P=0.8). Acute rejection was 15% and 19% in DCD and DBD patients respectively (OR, 1.0; 95% CI: 0.6-1.8; P=0.9). Thirty-day survival was similar between NRP (96.9%) and direct procurement and perfusion (DPP) (97%) (OR, 0.8; 95% CI: 0.2-3.9; P=0.8). PGD was higher in DCD (17%) compared with DBD (8%) patients (OR, 1.9; 95% CI: 0.98-3.7; P=0.06) whilst PGD for DPP and NRP was 21% and 14% respectively.ConclusionsDCD may offer comparable outcomes to DBD in short and mid-term outcomes, although PGD remains a concern. Further comparative research is required to delineate the role of both techniques in the current transplant landscape.
| S-EPMC11811570 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAlthough it has been widely recognized that heart transplantation (HT) following donation after circulatory death (DCD) can be a successful strategy to expand the donor pool, its clinical outcomes compared to donation after brain death (DBD) are still the subject of intense investigation. We reviewed the clinical characteristics of HT after DCD from the three largest multicenter nationwide registries, highlighting technical aspects, donor and recipient selection, and early outcomes. Moreover, we performed a meta-analysis of survival outcomes of DCD vs. DBD using reconstructed individual patient time-to-event data.MethodsThe PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus databases were searched in January 2024 to identify the most recent reports from three large multicenter nationwide registries (United States, United Kingdom, and Australia) of HT after DCD. Clinical characteristics were summarized using descriptive statistics, and survival curves were reconstructed for DBD using individual patient time-to-event data. The pooled hazard ratio (HR) with confidence interval (CI) was calculated via Cox regression.ResultsA total of 646 DCD HT patients and 7,253 DBD controls were included in this review. In the majority of cases, donors were young males. The mean age of recipients ranged from 48 to 57 years, and the majority were males with idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy. Up to 40% of patients required postoperative mechanical circulatory support with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). The meta-analysis estimated a pooled 1-year survival of 91.1% (95% CI: 88.6-93.7%) and 90.1% (95% CI: 89.4-90.8%) for DCD and DBD patients, respectively (P=0.91), with a pooled HR of 0.88 (95% CI: 0.65-1.20).ConclusionsAlthough the generally more favorable clinical profile of DCD donors and recipients may constitute a potential selection bias, our meta-analysis documented similar early and medium-term survival outcomes for DCD and DBD HT.
| S-EPMC11618126 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The use of kidneys donated after circulatory death (DCD) remains controversial due to concerns with regard to high incidences of early graft loss, delayed graft function (DGF), and impaired graft survival. As these concerns are mainly based on data from historical cohorts, they are prone to time-related effects and may therefore not apply to the current timeframe. To assess the impact of time on outcomes, we performed a time-dependent comparative analysis of outcomes of DCD and donation after brain death (DBD) kidney transplantations. Data of all 11,415 deceased-donor kidney transplantations performed in The Netherlands between 1990-2018 were collected. Based on the incidences of early graft loss, two eras were defined (1998-2008 [n = 3,499] and 2008-2018 [n = 3,781]), and potential time-related effects on outcomes evaluated. Multivariate analyses were applied to examine associations between donor type and outcomes. Interaction tests were used to explore presence of effect modification. Results show clear time-related effects on posttransplant outcomes. The 1998-2008 interval showed compromised outcomes for DCD procedures (higher incidences of DGF and early graft loss, impaired 1-year renal function, and inferior graft survival), whereas DBD and DCD outcome equivalence was observed for the 2008-2018 interval. This occurred despite persistently high incidences of DGF in DCD grafts, and more adverse recipient and donor risk profiles (recipients were 6 years older and the KDRI increased from 1.23 to 1.39 and from 1.35 to 1.49 for DBD and DCD donors). In contrast, the median cold ischaemic period decreased from 20 to 15 hours. This national study shows major improvements in outcomes of transplanted DCD kidneys over time. The time-dependent shift underpins that kidney transplantation has come of age and DCD results are nowadays comparable to DBD transplants. It also calls for careful interpretation of conclusions based on historical cohorts, and emphasises that retrospective studies should correct for time-related effects.
| S-EPMC7390443 | biostudies-literature
Project description: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.
| S-EPMC8766343 | biostudies-literature
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