Association between Longer Travel Distance for Transplant Care and Access to Kidney Transplantation and Graft Survival in the United States

2021 ◽  
pp. ASN.2020081242
Author(s):  
Adrian M. Whelan ◽  
Kirsten L. Johansen ◽  
Sandeep Brar ◽  
Charles E. McCulloch ◽  
Deborah B. Adey ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Kidney Transplantation ◽  
Graft Failure ◽  
Living Donor ◽  
Deceased Donor ◽  
The United States ◽  
Travel Distance ◽  
Transplant Center ◽  
Living Donor Transplantation ◽  
Transplant Candidates

BackgroundTransplant candidates may gain an advantage by traveling to receive care at a transplant center that may have more favorable characteristics than their local center. Factors associated with longer travel distance for transplant care and whether the excess travel distance (ETD) is associated with access to transplantation or with graft failure are unknown.MethodsThis study of adults in the United States wait-listed for kidney transplantation in 1995–2015 used ETD, defined as distance a patient traveled beyond the nearest transplant center for initial waiting list registration. We used linear regression to examine patient and center characteristics associated with ETD and Fine–Gray models to examine the association between ETD (modeled as a spline) and time to deceased or living donor transplantation or graft failure.ResultsOf 373,365 patients, 11% had an ETD≥50 miles. Traveling excess distance was more likely among patients who were of non-Black race or those whose nearest transplant center had lower annual living donor transplant volume. At an ETD of 50 miles, we observed a lower likelihood of deceased donor transplantation (subhazard ratio [SHR], 0.85; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.84 to 0.87) but higher likelihood of living donor transplantation (SHR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.12 to 1.16) compared with those who received care at their nearest center. ETD was weakly associated with higher risk of graft failure.ConclusionsPatients who travel excess distances for transplant care have better access to living donor but not deceased donor transplantation and slightly higher risk of graft failure. Traveling excess distances is not clearly associated with better outcomes, especially if living donors are unavailable.

scholarly journals COVID-19 and Living Donor Kidney Transplantation in Naples during the Pandemic

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 ◽  
pp. 1-4
Author(s):  
Gaia Peluso ◽  
Silvia Campanile ◽  
Alessandro Scotti ◽  
Vincenzo Tammaro ◽  
Akbar Jamshidi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Kidney Transplantation ◽  
Living Donor ◽  
Viral Infections ◽  
Elective Surgery ◽  
Deceased Donor ◽  
Kidney Transplants ◽  
Donor Kidney ◽  
Transplant Center ◽  
Living Donor Transplantation ◽  
Donor Kidney Transplantation

Introduction. SARS-CoV-2 is a virus that causes a potentially deadly syndrome that affects especially the respiratory tract. Kidney-transplanted patients are immunosuppressed and more susceptible to viral infections. We have examined our transplantation activity to explore the future role of kidney transplantation from deceased and living donors in COVID-19 era. Patients and Methods. The activity of our transplant center of Naples (one of the two transplant centers in Campania, South Italy) continued during the COVID-19 pandemic. We have analysed the kidney transplants carried out between March 9 and June 9, 2020, comparing these data with the numbers of procedures performed in the two previous years. Moreover, we have considered the possibility of performing living donor transplants during a worldwide pandemic. Results. From March 9, 2020, when the Italian lockdown begun, till June 9, 2020, five kidney transplants have been performed at our transplant center in Naples, all from deceased donors. The donors and the recipients have been screened for COVID-19 infection, and the patients, all asymptomatic, followed strict preventive measures and were fully informed about the risks of surgery and immunosuppression during a pandemic. All the transplanted patients remained COVID negative during the follow-up. The number of transplants performed has been constant compared to the same months of 2018 and 2019. In agreement with the patients, we decided to postpone living donor transplants to a period of greater control of the SARS-CoV-2 spread in Italy. Conclusion. Deceased donor kidney transplantation should continue, especially in a region with moderate risk, like Campania, with a more careful selection of donors and recipients, preferring standard donors and recipients without severe comorbidities. Living donor transplantation program, instead, should be postponed to a period of greater control of the SARS-CoV-2 spread, as it is an elective surgery and its delay does not determine additional risks for patients.

scholarly journals Major Variation across Local Transplant Centers in Probability of Kidney Transplant for Wait-Listed Patients

2020 ◽  
Vol 31 (12) ◽  
pp. 2900-2911 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kristen L. King ◽  
S. Ali Husain ◽  
Jesse D. Schold ◽  
Rachel E. Patzer ◽  
Peter P. Reese ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Kidney Transplantation ◽  
Kidney Transplant ◽  
Deceased Donor ◽  
The United States ◽  
Donor Kidney ◽  
Deceased Donor Kidney ◽  
Living Donor Transplantation ◽  
Donor Kidney Transplantation ◽  
Deceased Donor Kidney Transplantation

BackgroundGeographic disparities in access to deceased donor kidney transplantation persist in the United States under the Kidney Allocation System (KAS) introduced in 2014, and the effect of transplant center practices on the probability of transplantation for wait-listed patients remains unclear.MethodsTo compare probability of transplantation across centers nationally and within donation service areas (DSAs), we conducted a registry study that included all United States incident adult kidney transplant candidates wait listed in 2011 and 2015 (pre-KAS and post-KAS cohorts comprising 32,745 and 34,728 individuals, respectively). For each center, we calculated the probability of deceased donor kidney transplantation within 3 years of wait listing using competing risk regression, with living donor transplantation, death, and waiting list removal as competing events. We examined associations between center-level and DSA-level characteristics and the adjusted probability of transplant.ResultsCandidates received deceased donor kidney transplants within 3 years of wait listing more frequently post-KAS (22%) than pre-KAS (19%). Nationally, the probability of transplant varied 16-fold between centers, ranging from 4.0% to 64.2% in the post-KAS era. Within DSAs, we observed a median 2.3-fold variation between centers, with up to ten-fold and 57.4 percentage point differences. Probability of transplantation was correlated in the post-KAS cohort with center willingness to accept hard-to-place kidneys (r=0.55, P<0.001) and local organ supply (r=0.44, P<0.001).ConclusionsLarge differences in the adjusted probability of deceased donor kidney transplantation persist under KAS, even between centers working with the same local organ supply. Probability of transplantation is significantly associated with organ offer acceptance patterns at transplant centers, underscoring the need for greater understanding of how centers make decisions about organs offered to wait-listed patients and how they relate to disparities in access to transplantation.

Clinical Management of Kidney Transplant Recipients

2019 ◽  
pp. 457-459
Author(s):  
James A. Onigkeit
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Transplant Recipient ◽  
Kidney Transplant ◽  
Clinical Management ◽  
Living Donor ◽  
Kidney Transplant Recipient ◽  
Deceased Donor ◽  
The United States ◽  
Transplant Recipients ◽  
Kidney Transplant Recipients

Kidney transplant is common. More than 19,000 kidney transplants were performed in the United States in 2017. About two-thirds were deceased donor transplants, and about one-third were living donor transplants. The clinical management of a kidney transplant recipient begins in the operating room. Posttransplant complications can be divided into 2 categories: surgical and medical.

Impact of Physical Function on 1-Year Kidney Transplant Outcomes

2019 ◽  
Vol 42 (1) ◽  
pp. 50-56
Author(s):  
Jongwon Yoo ◽  
Chang Gi Park ◽  
Catherine Ryan
Keyword(s):  
Kidney Transplantation ◽  
Physical Function ◽  
Graft Survival ◽  
Graft Failure ◽  
Deceased Donor ◽  
Hazard Ratio ◽  
Survival Outcomes ◽  
Living Donor Transplantation ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
The Impact

End-stage renal disease patients who have impaired physical function are denied for transplantation by clinicians concerned about graft/survival outcomes. The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of physical function on graft/survival outcomes at 1-year post-kidney transplantation. Data were analyzed from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients regarding kidney transplantation patients ( N = 218,657) between January 1, 2000 and September 2, 2014. The hazard ratio of 1-year graft failure for deceased donor transplantation recipients needing total assistance was 1.60 (95% confidence interval [CI] = [1.303, 1.965], p < .01). Patients needing none or some assistance did not demonstrate a significant difference in 1-year graft failure in either deceased or living donor transplantation. The hazard ratio of 1-year death for those needing total assistance was 2.52 (95% CI = [2.087, 3.045], p < .001) in deceased donor kidney transplantation.

scholarly journals Trends in Disparities in Preemptive Kidney Transplantation in the United States

2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (10) ◽  
pp. 1500-1511 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kristen L. King ◽  
Syed Ali Husain ◽  
Zhezhen Jin ◽  
Corey Brennan ◽  
Sumit Mohan
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Kidney Transplantation ◽  
Private Insurance ◽  
Deceased Donor ◽  
The United States ◽  
Transplant Recipients ◽  
Donor Kidney ◽  
Deceased Donor Kidney ◽  
Medicare Patients ◽  
Preemptive Transplantation

Background and objectivesLong wait times for deceased donor kidneys and low rates of preemptive wait-listing have limited preemptive transplantation in the United States. We aimed to assess trends in preemptive deceased donor transplantation with the introduction of the new Kidney Allocation System (KAS) in 2014 and identify whether key disparities in preemptive transplantation have changed.Design, setting, participants, & measurementsWe identified adult deceased donor kidney transplant recipients in the United States from 2000 to 2018 using the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients. Preemptive transplantation was defined as no dialysis before transplant. Associations between recipient, donor, transplant, and policy era characteristics and preemptive transplantation were calculated using logistic regression. To test for modification by KAS policy era, an interaction term between policy era and each characteristic of interest was introduced in bivariate and adjusted models.ResultsThe proportion of preemptive transplants increased after implementation of KAS from 9.0% to 9.8%, with 1.10 (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.06 to 1.14) times higher odds of preemptive transplantation post-KAS compared with pre-KAS. Preemptive recipients were more likely to be white, older, female, more educated, hold private insurance, and have ESKD cause other than diabetes or hypertension. Policy era significantly modified the association between preemptive transplantation and race, age, insurance status, and Human Leukocyte Antigen zero-mismatch (interaction P<0.05). Medicare patients had a significantly lower odds of preemptive transplantation relative to private insurance holders (pre-KAS adjusted OR, [aOR] 0.26; [95% CI, 0.25 to 0.27], to 0.20 [95% CI, 0.18 to 0.22] post-KAS). Black and Hispanic patients experienced a similar phenomenon (aOR 0.48 [95% CI, 0.45 to 0.51] to 0.41 [95% CI, 0.37 to 0.45] and 0.43 [95% CI, 0.40 to 0.47] to 0.40 [95% CI, 0.36 to 0.46] respectively) compared with white patients.ConclusionsAlthough the proportion of deceased donor kidney transplants performed preemptively increased slightly after KAS, disparities in preemptive kidney transplantation persisted after the 2014 KAS policy changes and were exacerbated for racial minorities and Medicare patients.

Dialysis Facility Profit Status and Early Steps in Kidney Transplantation in the Southeastern United States

2021 ◽  
pp. CJN.17691120
Author(s):  
Laura J. McPherson ◽  
Elizabeth R. Walker ◽  
Yi-Ting Hana Lee ◽  
Jennifer C. Gander ◽  
Zhensheng Wang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Cohort Study ◽  
Kidney Transplantation ◽  
Confidence Interval ◽  
Kidney Failure ◽  
The United States ◽  
For Profit ◽  
Transplant Center ◽  
Dialysis Facility ◽  
Profit Status

Background and objectivesDialysis facilities in the United States play a key role in access to kidney transplantation. Previous studies reported that patients treated at for-profit facilities are less likely to be waitlisted and receive a transplant, but their effect on early steps in the transplant process is unknown. The study’s objective was to determine the association between dialysis facility profit status and critical steps in the transplantation process in Georgia, North Carolina, and South Carolina.Design, setting, participants, & measurementsIn this retrospective cohort study, we linked referral and evaluation data from all nine transplant centers in the Southeast with United States Renal Data System surveillance data. The cohort study included 33,651 patients with kidney failure initiating dialysis from January 1, 2012 to August 31, 2016. Patients were censored for event (date of referral, evaluation, or waitlisting), death, or end of study (August 31, 2017 for referral and March 1, 2018 for evaluation and waitlisting). The primary exposure was dialysis facility profit status: for profit versus nonprofit. The primary outcome was referral for evaluation at a transplant center after dialysis initiation. Secondary outcomes were start of evaluation at a transplant center after referral and waitlisting.ResultsOf the 33,651 patients with incident kidney failure, most received dialysis treatment at a for-profit facility (85%). For-profit (versus nonprofit) facilities had a lower cumulative incidence difference for referral within 1 year of dialysis (−4.5%; 95% confidence interval, −6.0% to −3.2%). In adjusted analyses, for-profit versus nonprofit facilities had lower referral (hazard ratio, 0.84; 95% confidence interval, 0.80 to 0.88). Start of evaluation within 6 months of referral (−1.0%; 95% confidence interval, −3.1% to 1.3%) and waitlisting within 6 months of evaluation (1.0%; 95% confidence interval, −1.2 to 3.3) did not meaningfully differ between groups.ConclusionsFindings suggest lower access to referral among patients dialyzing in for-profit facilities in the Southeast United States, but no difference in starting the evaluation and waitlisting by facility profit status.

scholarly journals Effects of COVID19 Pandemic on Pediatric Kidney Transplant in the United States

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Olga Charnaya ◽  
Teresa Po-Yu Chiang ◽  
Richard Wang ◽  
Jennifer Motter ◽  
Brian Boyarsky ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Kidney Transplantation ◽  
Disease Transmission ◽  
National Level ◽  
Rapid Change ◽  
Deceased Donor ◽  
The United States ◽  
Transplant Recipients ◽  
Pediatric Kidney Transplantation ◽  
Sustained Effect

Abstract In March 2020, COVID-19 infections began to rise exponentially in the United States, placing substantial burden on the healthcare system. As a result, there was a rapid change in transplant practices and policies, with cessation of most procedures. Our goal was to understand changes to pediatric kidney transplantation (KT) at the national level during the COVID-19 epidemic. Using SRTR data, we examined changes in pediatric waitlist registration, waitlist removal or inactivation, and deceased donor and living donor (DDKT/LDKT) events during the start of the disease transmission in the United States compared to the same time the previous year. We saw an initial decrease in DDKT and LDKT by 47% and 82% compared to expected events and then a continual increase, with numbers reaching expected pre-pandemic levels by May 2020. In the early phase of the pandemic, waitlist inactivation and removals due to death or deteriorating condition rose above expected values by 152% and 189%, respectively. There was a statistically significant decrease in new waitlist additions (IRR 0.49 0.65 0.85) and LDKT (IRR 0.17 0.38 0.84) in states with high vs low COVID activity. Transplant recipients during the pandemic were more likely to have received a DDKT, but had similar cPRA, waitlist time and cause of ESRD as before the pandemic. The COVID-19 pandemic initially reduced access to kidney transplantation among pediatric patients in the United States, but has not had a sustained effect.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document