Dataset Information

Characterization of Transplant Center Decisions to Allocate Kidneys to Candidates With Lower Waiting List Priority.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Allocation of deceased donor kidneys is meant to follow a ranked match-run list of eligible candidates, but transplant centers with a 1-to-1 relationship with their local organ procurement organization have full discretion to decline offers for higher-priority candidates and accept them for lower-ranked candidates at their center.

Objective

To describe the practice and frequency of transplant centers placing deceased donor kidneys with candidates who are not the highest rank at their center according to the allocation algorithm.

Design, setting, and participants

This retrospective cohort study used 2015 to 2019 organ offer data from US transplant centers with a 1-to-1 relationship with their local organ procurement organization, following candidates for transplant events from January 2015 to December 2019. Participants were deceased kidney donors with a single match-run and at least 1 kidney transplanted locally and adult, first-time, kidney-only transplant candidates receiving at least 1 offer for a locally transplanted deceased donor kidney. Data were analyzed from March 1, 2022 to March 28, 2023.

Exposure

Demographic and clinical characteristics of donors and recipients.

Main outcomes and measures

The outcome of interest was kidney transplantation into the highest-priority candidate (defined as transplanted after zero declines for local candidates in the match-run) vs a lower-ranked candidate.

Results

This study assessed 26 579 organ offers from 3136 donors (median [IQR] age, 38 [25-51] years; 2903 [62%] men) to 4668 recipients. Transplant centers skipped their highest-ranked candidate to place kidneys further down the match-run for 3169 kidneys (68%). These kidneys went to a median (IQR) of the fourth- (third- to eighth-) ranked candidate. Higher kidney donor profile index (KDPI; higher score indicates lower quality) kidneys were less likely to go to the highest-ranked candidate, with 24% of kidneys with KDPI of at least 85% going to the top-ranked candidate vs 44% of KDPI 0% to 20% kidneys. When comparing estimated posttransplant survival (EPTS) scores between the skipped candidates and the ultimate recipients, kidneys were placed with recipients with both better and worse EPTS than the skipped candidates, across all KDPI risk groups.

Conclusions and relevance

In this cohort study of local kidney allocation at isolated transplant centers, we found that centers frequently skipped their highest-priority candidates to place kidneys further down the allocation prioritization list, often citing organ quality concerns but placing kidneys with recipients with both better and worse EPTS with nearly equal frequency. This occurred with limited transparency and highlights the opportunity to improve the matching and offer algorithm to improve allocation efficiency.

SUBMITTER: King KL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10242426 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Characterization of Transplant Center Decisions to Allocate Kidneys to Candidates With Lower Waiting List Priority.

King Kristen L KL Husain S Ali SA Yu Miko M Adler Joel T JT Schold Jesse J Mohan Sumit S

JAMA network open 20230601 6

<h4>Importance</h4>Allocation of deceased donor kidneys is meant to follow a ranked match-run list of eligible candidates, but transplant centers with a 1-to-1 relationship with their local organ procurement organization have full discretion to decline offers for higher-priority candidates and accept them for lower-ranked candidates at their center.<h4>Objective</h4>To describe the practice and frequency of transplant centers placing deceased donor kidneys with candidates who are not the highest ...[more]

PMID: 37273203

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceWith continuing improvements in medical devices and more than a decade since the 2006 United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) allocation policy, it is pertinent to assess survival among patients on the heart transplantation waiting list, especially given the recently approved 2018 UNOS allocation policy.ObjectivesTo assess survival outcomes among patients on the heart transplant waiting list during the past 3 decades and to examine the association of ventricular assist devices (VADs) and the 2006 UNOS allocation policy with survival.Design, setting, and participantsA retrospective cross-sectional used the UNOS database to perform an analysis of 95 323 candidates wait-listed for heart transplantation between January 1, 1987, and December 29, 2017. Candidates for all types of combined transplants were excluded (n = 2087). Patients were followed up from the time of listing to death, transplantation, or removal from the list due to clinical improvement. Competing-risk, Kaplan-Meier, and multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression analyses were used.Main outcomes and measuresThe analysis involved an unadjusted and adjusted survival analysis in which the primary outcome was death on the waiting list. Because of changing waiting list preferences and policies during the study period, the intrinsic risk of death for wait-listed candidates was assessed by individually analyzing, comparing, and adjusting for several candidate risk factors.ResultsIn total, 95 323 candidates (72 915 men [76.5%]; mean [SD] age, 51.9 [12.0] years) were studied. In the setting of changes in listing preferences, 1-year survival on the waiting list increased from 34.1% in 1987-1990 to 67.8% in 2011-2017 (difference in proportions, 0.34%; 95% CI, 0.32%-0.36%; P < .001). The 1-year waiting list survival for candidates with VADs increased from 10.2% in 1996-2000 to 70.0% in 2011-2017 (difference in proportions, 0.60%; 95% CI, 0.58%-0.62%; P < .001). Similarly, in the setting of changing mechanical circulatory support indications, the 1-year waiting list survival for patients without VADs increased from 53.9% in 1996-2000 to 66.5% in 2011-2017 (difference in proportions, 0.13%; 95% CI, 0.12%-0.14%; P < .001). In the decade prior to the 2006 UNOS allocation policy, the 1-year waiting list survival was 51.1%, while in the decade after it was 63.9% (difference in proportions, 0.13%; 95% CI, 0.12%-0.14%; P < .001). In adjusted analysis, each time period after 1987-1990 had a marked decrease in waiting list mortality.Conclusions and relevanceThis study found temporally associated increases in heart transplant waiting list survival for all patient groups (with or without VADs, UNOS status 1 and status 2 candidates, and candidates with poor functional status).

Project description:Background & aimsMalnutrition, sarcopenia, and frailty are prevalent in cirrhosis. We aimed to assess the correlation between assessment tools for malnutrition, sarcopenia, and frailty in patients on the liver transplant (LT) waiting list (WL), and to identify a predictive model for acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) development.MethodsThis prospective single-center study enrolled consecutive patients with cirrhosis on the WL for LT (May 2019-November 2021). Assessments included subjective global assessment, CT body composition, skeletal muscle index (SMI), ultrasound thigh muscle thickness, sarcopenia HIBA score, liver frailty index (LFI), hand grip strength, and 6-minute walk test at enrollment. Correlations were analyzed using Pearson's correlation. Competing risk regression analysis was used to assess the predictive ability of the liver- and functional physiological reserve-related variables for ACLF.ResultsA total of 132 patients, predominantly with decompensated cirrhosis (87%), were included. Our study revealed a high prevalence of malnutrition (61%), sarcopenia (61%), visceral obesity (20%), sarcopenic visceral obesity (17%), and frailty (10%) among participants. Correlations between the assessment tools for sarcopenia and frailty were poor. Sarcopenia by SMI remained prevalent when frailty assessments were not usable. After a median follow-up of 10 months, 39% of the patients developed ACLF on WL, while 28% experienced dropouts without ACLF. Multivariate analysis identified MELD-Na, SMI, and LFI as independent predictors of ACLF on the WL. The predictive model MELD-Na-sarcopenia-LFI had a C-statistic of 0.85.ConclusionsThe poor correlation between sarcopenia assessment tools and frailty underscores the importance of a comprehensive evaluation. The SMI, LFI, and MELD-Na independently predicted ACLF development in WL. These findings enhance our understanding of the relationship between sarcopenia, frailty, and ACLF in patients awaiting LT, emphasizing the need for early detection and intervention to improve WL outcomes.Impact and implicationsThe relationship between sarcopenia and frailty assessment tools, as well as their ability to predict acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) in patients on the liver transplant (LT) waiting list (WL), remains poorly understood. Existing objective frailty screening tests have limitations when applied to critically ill patients. The correlation between sarcopenia and frailty assessment tools was weak, suggesting that they may capture different phenotypes. Sarcopenia assessed by skeletal muscle index, frailty evaluated using the liver frailty index, and the model for end-stage liver disease-Na score independently predicted the development of ACLF in patients on the WL. Our findings support the integration of liver frailty index and skeletal muscle index assessments at the time of inclusion on the WL for LT. This combined approach allows for the identification of a specific patient subgroup with an increased susceptibility to ACLF, underscoring the importance of early implementation of targeted treatment strategies to improve outcomes for patients awaiting LT.

Project description:BackgroundUnder the current liver-transplantation policy, donor organs are offered to patients with the highest risk of death.MethodsUsing data derived from all adult candidates for primary liver transplantation who were registered with the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network in 2005 and 2006, we developed and validated a multivariable survival model to predict mortality at 90 days after registration. The predictor variable was the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score with and without the addition of the serum sodium concentration. The MELD score (on a scale of 6 to 40, with higher values indicating more severe disease) is calculated on the basis of the serum bilirubin and creatinine concentrations and the international normalized ratio for the prothrombin time.ResultsIn 2005, there were 6769 registrants, including 1781 who underwent liver transplantation and 422 who died within 90 days after registration on the waiting list. Both the MELD score and the serum sodium concentration were significantly associated with mortality (hazard ratio for death, 1.21 per MELD point and 1.05 per 1-unit decrease in the serum sodium concentration for values between 125 and 140 mmol per liter; P<0.001 for both variables). Furthermore, a significant interaction was found between the MELD score and the serum sodium concentration, indicating that the effect of the serum sodium concentration was greater in patients with a low MELD score. When applied to the data from 2006, when 477 patients died within 3 months after registration on the waiting list, the combination of the MELD score and the serum sodium concentration was considerably higher than the MELD score alone in 32 patients who died (7%). Thus, assignment of priority according to the MELD score combined with the serum sodium concentration might have resulted in transplantation and prevented death.ConclusionsThis population-wide study shows that the MELD score and the serum sodium concentration are important predictors of survival among candidates for liver transplantation.

Dataset Information

Characterization of Transplant Center Decisions to Allocate Kidneys to Candidates With Lower Waiting List Priority.

Importance

Objective

Design, setting, and participants

Exposure

Main outcomes and measures

Results

Conclusions and relevance

Publications

Characterization of Transplant Center Decisions to Allocate Kidneys to Candidates With Lower Waiting List Priority.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets