Center Effect on Long-term Post-transplant Survival Among Currently Active United States Heart Transplant Centers

2018 ◽  
Vol 37 (4) ◽  
pp. S49-S50
Author(s):  
T.P. Singh ◽  
K. Gauvreau
Circulation ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 142 (Suppl_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Allison P Levin ◽  
Thomas C Hanff ◽  
Robert S Zhang ◽  
Rhondalyn C McLean ◽  
Joyce W Wald ◽  
...  

Background: Non-citizens of the United States face complex social and economic issues, which may impact their post-transplant outcomes compared to US citizens. To this end, we utilized the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) database to examine post-heart transplant (OHT) outcomes, stratified by citizenship status. Methods: UNOS was queried to identify OHT recipients from 03/01/12 (start of new schema for citizenship categorization) through 10/18/18 (start of new heart allocation algorithm). Groups for analysis, were as follows: US Citizen, Non-US Citizen/Resident (NC-R) and Non-US Citizen/Non-US Resident (NC-NR). Post-transplant survival and rate of post-transplant rejection were assessed via Kaplan-Meier analysis and tests of proportions. Results: Of the 16,211 OHT recipients identified, 15,677 (96.7%) were US citizens and 534 (3.3%) were Non-Citizens. Among Non-Citizens, 430 were NC-R and 104 were NC-NR, representing 2.7% and 0.6% of the total transplants. Notably, NC-NR were younger than either Citizens or NC-R, and had the shortest median time from listing to transplant (NC-R 80 days vs. Citizens 107 days vs. NC-NR 76 days, p=0.001). The proportion of transplants received by non-citizens varied widely by region, ranging from 0.59% in region 8 (6/1018) to 8.31% (84/1011) in region 9. There was no significant difference in post-transplant survival estimates in citizens vs. non-citizens (logrank p = 0.542), nor in the proportion of patients treated for rejection by one year (15.0% vs. 16.1%, p= 0.504) Conclusion: Non-US Citizens receive three percent of heart transplants performed in the US each year. Post-heart transplant survival and rate of rejection are similar in US citizens and non-citizens. These data may be relevant in the context of evolving UNOS policies. Additional studies are needed are to further inform organ allocation policy.


2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 354-360 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Ali Husain ◽  
Kristen L. King ◽  
Geoffrey K. Dube ◽  
Demetra Tsapepas ◽  
David J. Cohen ◽  
...  

Introduction: The Kidney Allocation System in the United States prioritizes candidates with Estimated Post-Transplant Survival (EPTS) ≤20% to receive deceased donor kidneys with Kidney Donor Profile Index (KDPI) ≤20%. Research Question: We compared access to KDPI ≤ 20% kidneys for EPTS ≤ 20% candidates across the United States to determine whether geographic disparities in access to these low KDPI kidneys exist. Design: We identified all incident adult deceased donor kidney candidates wait-listed January 1, 2015, to March 31, 2018, using United Network for Organ Sharing data. We calculated the proportion of candidates transplanted, final EPTS, and KDPI of transplanted kidneys for candidates listed with EPTS ≤ 20% versus >20%. We compared the odds of receiving a KDPI ≤ 20% deceased donor kidney for EPTS ≤ 20% candidates across regions using logistic regression. Results: Among 121 069 deceased donor kidney candidates, 28.5% had listing EPTS ≤ 20%. Of these, 16.1% received deceased donor kidney transplants (candidates listed EPTS > 20%: 17.1% transplanted) and 12.3% lost EPTS ≤ 20% status. Only 49.4% of transplanted EPTS ≤ 20% candidates received a KDPI ≤ 20% kidney, and 48.3% of KDPI ≤ 20% kidneys went to recipients with EPTS > 20% at the time of transplantation. Odds of receiving a KDPI ≤ 20% kidney were highest in region 6 and lowest in region 9 (odds ratio 0.19 [0.13 to 0.28]). The ratio of KDPI ≤ 20% donors per EPTS ≤ 20% candidate and likelihood of KDPI ≤ 20% transplantation were strongly correlated ( r 2 = 0.84). Discussion: Marked geographic variation in the likelihood of receiving a KDPI ≤ 20% deceased donor kidney among transplanted EPTS ≤ 20% candidates exists and is related to differences in organ availability within allocation borders. Policy changes to improve organ sharing are needed to improve equity in access to low KDPI kidneys.


2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 213-219
Author(s):  
Danielle Brandman ◽  
Hollis Lin ◽  
Anastasia McManus ◽  
Sonalee Agarwal ◽  
Larry M. Gache ◽  
...  

Introduction: Orthotopic liver transplantation has been used as a treatment for hereditary transthyretin-mediated (hATTR) amyloidosis, a rare, progressive, and multisystem disease. Research Question: The objective is to evaluate survival outcomes post-liver transplantation in patients with hATTR amyloidosis in the United States and assess whether previously published prognostic factors of patient survival in hATTR amyloidosis are generalizable to the US population. Design: This cohort study examined patients with hATTR amyloidosis undergoing liver transplant in the United States (N = 168) between March 2002 and March 2016 using data reported to the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (UNOS)/United Network for Organ Sharing (OPTN). Results: A multivariable Cox hazards regression model showed among all factors tested, only modified body mass index (kg/m2 × g/L) at the time of transplant was significantly associated with survival. Higher modified BMI was associated with lower risk of death relative to a reference population (<600) with historically poor post-transplant outcomes. Patients with modified BMI 1000 to <1200 (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.27; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.10-0.73), 1200 to <1400 (HR = 0.20; 95% CI = 0.06-0.75), and ≥1400 (HR = 0.15; 95% CI = 0.04-0.61) exhibited improved adjusted 5-year post-transplant survival of 74%, 80%, and 85%, respectively, versus 33% in the reference population. Discussion: The association between a higher modified BMI threshold at the time of transplant and improved post-transplant survival suggests that the previously published patient selection criterion for modified BMI may not be applicable to the US population.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document