Increased Distance to a Liver Transplant Center Is Associated With Higher Mortality for Patients With Chronic Liver Failure

Longer travel and traffic are associated with adult liver transplant waitlist mortality in the United States

Transportation to transplant centers is a barrier to liver transplantation (LT). We analyzed the impact of travel metrics on LT waitlist outcomes in the United States. A total of 83 640 adult LT candidates in the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients database (2013-2021) were included. Google Distance Matrix application programming interface estimated driving time from patients' residing ZIP code to listing center. Effect of travel time (short [<1 hour], medium [1 to < 3 hours], or long [3 to < 6 hours]), traffic congestion in metropolitan areas, and center mismatch (defined as listing at a center >1 hour from nearest center) on waitlist mortality were examined using multivariable competing risk regression with adjustment for confounders. Compared to short travel, medium (HR 1.09 [95% CI: 1.05-1.13]) and long travel times (HR 1.14 [95% CI: 1.08-1.20]) were associated with higher waitlist mortality. Both high (HR 1.09 [95% CI: 1.01-1.12]) and moderate traffic (HR 1.09 [95% CI 1.02-1.15]) was also associated with higher waitlist mortality compared to low traffic. Lastly, there was no relationship between center mismatch (9.1% of listed) and waitlist deaths. Longer travel and traffic congestion are associated with greater waitlist mortality for adult LT candidates. Strategies to address these underrecognized spatial barriers to LT are needed.

The new digital era in decompensated cirrhosis

There is a growing global burden of liver disease with the current management for complications of liver cirrhosis being reactive as opposed to proactive, affecting outcomes. Management can often be suboptimal in overburdened health-care systems with considerable socioeconomic and geographical disparity existing, which was exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic, highlighting the need for sustainable care pathways to be delivered remotely. To this end, digital health care could be the key and, in this Review, we highlight the principal studies that have explored the use of digital technology in the management of cirrhosis complications. While digital health care is a somewhat new field, considerable advances have been made in various domains, particularly in the development of remote monitoring and risk modelling. We aim to provide a balanced perspective of the opportunities for and barriers to the integration of digital technology into established liver-care pathways. Lastly, we reflect on the current acceptability of digital health care and the required future directions to ensure the digital transformation of hepatology is a success.

A qualitative study of end-stage liver disease and liver transplant referral practices among primary care providers in nonurban America

PURPOSE

In rural America, the road to obtaining a liver transplant (LTX) often starts at the primary care provider's (PCP's) office. Patients with end-stage liver disease (ESLD) in rural communities experience lower rates of wait-listing and higher mortality. This study identifies issues related to the knowledge and perceptions of ESLD and LTX referral among PCPs in rural Kentucky (KY).

METHODS

The study protocol involved relying upon a semistructured outline to explore the knowledge, attitude, and perceptions of PCPs toward ESLD and LTX referral among PCPs in rural KY. Inductive thematic analysis was utilized to identify, analyze, and report themes.

FINDINGS

From the focus group interviews, three themes were identified: medical culture, gaps in knowledge, and bias against those with self-induced causes of ESLD. Each theme illuminated barriers to referral for transplant evaluation.

CONCLUSIONS

Knowledge gaps, attitudes in medical culture, and biases surrounding ESLD and LTX referral exist in community medicine practice. This highlights the importance of education, resources, and facilitation of LTX referral processes for PCPs.

Social Disadvantage and Disparities in Chronic Liver Disease: A Systematic Review

INTRODUCTION

Social determinants of health (SDOH) may impact chronic liver disease (CLD) outcomes but are not clearly understood. We conducted a systematic review to describe the associations of SDOH with mortality, hospitalizations, and readmissions among patients with CLD.

METHODS

This review was registered (PROSPERO ID: CRD42022346654) and identified articles through MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Scopus databases. The review included studies that reported SDOH characteristics within the domains of economic stability, healthcare access, education, social and community context, and the neighborhood-built environment. Associated outcomes of interest were mortality, hospitalizations, or readmissions. The Cochrane Risk of Bias in Nonrandomized Studies for Exposure was used to assess study quality and risk of bias.

RESULTS

A total of 5,205 abstracts were screened, 60 articles underwent full-text review, and 27 articles were included in the final review. Poor economic stability, healthcare access, social support, and household/environmental conditions were associated with higher mortality and hospital readmissions among patients with CLD. Increasing distance (≥25 miles away) from a liver transplantation center was associated with higher mortality, despite increasing access to the liver transplantation waitlist. When assessing the overall risk of bias among included studies, most had "some concern" (N = 13, 48.1%) or "high risk" (N = 11, 40.7%), whereas a minority had "very high risk" (N = 3, 11.1%). No studies were categorized as "low risk."

DISCUSSION

Unfavorable SDOH were associated with increased mortality and hospital readmissions among patients with CLD. Rigorous empirical research is needed to identify evidence-based strategies that aim to mitigate disparities among vulnerable populations.

Current Burden of and Geographic Disparities in Liver Mortality and Access to Liver Transplant

Importance

Liver disease is a leading cause of mortality in the US. Liver transplant can be a lifesaving procedure for patients with severe liver disease.

Objective

To assess temporal trends and geographic variance in liver-related mortality (LRM) and liver transplant in the US.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this cohort study, the frequencies and geographic variance of LRM in 2018 and 2021 were obtained in a cross-sectional analysis of the Underlying Cause of Death data available on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Epidemiologic Research database. The number of livers donated and transplanted according to the state of residence of each donor and recipient were obtained from the United Network for Organ Sharing.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Liver-related mortality in 2018 and 2021, overall and by state, as well as the liver transplant rate according to state of residence of recipient and donor.

Results

Overall LRM in the US was 93 418 in 2021, with a crude rate of 28.1 per 100 000 individuals, an increase of 19.1% compared with rates seen immediately prior to the COVID-19 pandemic in 2018 (77 282 [23.6 per 100 000 individuals]). Liver-related mortality in 2021 varied several-fold between states, from 18.4 per 100 000 individuals per year in Utah to 65.9 per 100 000 individuals per year in New Mexico. The mean number of liver-related deaths per transplant from all donor sources (in state and out of state) was 7.2 in the lowest LRM quintile compared with 21.5 in the highest (95% CI, 12.1-16.6; SE, 1.1; P < .001). Ten states had no liver transplant center. Paradoxically, residents of states with the highest LRM had a much lower rate of liver transplant (at any location) from organs procured from in-state residents than states with the lowest LRM quintile (13.0% vs 35.2% in-state donors; 95% CI, 14.1%-30.3%; SE, 3.9%; P < .001).

Conclusions and Relevance

This study suggests that rates of LRM have increased dramatically since the COVID-19 pandemic and vary several-fold between states. Rates of liver transplant are paradoxically lowest among residents living in states with the highest LRM. These findings highlight apparent geographic disparities in access to liver transplant that allocation policy cannot address.

Design, implementation, and impact of a cirrhosis-specific remote patient monitoring program

BACKGROUND

Remote patient monitoring (RPM) is an emerging focus in health care, and specialized programs may reduce medical costs, supplement in-office visits, and improve patient satisfaction. In this study, we describe the development, feasibility, and early outcomes of an RPM program for patients with decompensated cirrhosis.

METHODS

Forty-six patients were offered enrollment at the time of hospital discharge in the cirrhosis RPM program (CiRPM), of which 41 completed at least 30 days of monitoring. Participants were mailed remote monitoring equipment and a tablet to be used for patient-reported outcomes. Alerts were continuously monitored by virtual nursing staff who could perform targeted interventions. A cohort of historical controls (n = 74) was created for comparison using inverse probability of treatment weighting.

RESULTS

Patients were enrolled in the program for a mean of 83.9 days, with 28 (68%) completing the full 90-day program. Participants uploaded vital signs and responded to symptom-based questionnaires on 93% of the monitored days. On end-of-program surveys, over 75% of patients expressed satisfaction with the program. Gender, age, and MELD-Na were similar between CiRPM and weighted control groups. The 90-day readmission rate was 34% in CiRPM and 47% in weighted controls. In the CiRPM group, 12% of subjects had 2 or more admissions, compared to 37% in the weighted control group.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates the feasibility of a cirrhosis-specific RPM program. Overall, patient satisfaction and utilization of the CiRPM was high. Future studies are needed to confirm the impact of RPM on the reduction of hospital readmissions in decompensated cirrhosis.

Waiting for a Liver Transplant in New Mexico; Understanding the State's Multi-layered Adversity

Contrary to the assumption of consistent medical care for patients with specific illnesses in the United States, research reveals vast inconsistencies and inequalities in healthcare delivery, affecting various aspects such as mental illness diagnosis and management, life expectancy differences, overall mortality rates, and healthcare accessibility due to racial, ethnic, and cultural disparities. Liver transplantation, particularly studied in the context of the state of New Mexico (NM), highlights the multilayered inherent disadvantages faced by its citizens. Despite these challenges, the new liver transplantation allocation system implemented by the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) in 2020, which focuses on geographic concentric circles rather than donor service areas (DSA), cautiously raises hope for reducing these inequities. The future of decades' worth of adversity remains uncertain, but we are optimistic that New Mexicans' systemic difficulty in getting a new liver would eventually be eased.

The Influence of Urbanization on the Patterns of Hepatocellular Carcinoma Mortality From 1999 to 2020

Background

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains one of the leading causes of cancer-related fatalities despite early diagnosis and treatment progress, creating a significant public health issue in the United States. This investigation utilized death certificate data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Wide-ranging Online Data for Epidemiologic Research (CDC WONDER) database to investigate HCC mortality patterns and death locations from 1999 to 2020. The objective was to analyze trends in HCC mortality across different population groups, considering the impact of urbanicity.

Methods

In this study, death certificate data obtained from the CDC WONDER database were utilized to investigate the trends in HCC mortality and location of death between 1999 and 2020. The annual percent change (APC) method was applied to estimate the average annual rate of change during the specified timeframe for the relevant health outcome. Furthermore, including data on the location of death and geographic areas allowed us to gain deeper insights into the patterns and characteristics of HCC and its impact on different regions.

Results

Between 1999 and 2020, there were 184,073 reported deaths attributed to HCC, and data on the location of death were available for all cases. Most deaths occurred during inpatient admissions (34.93%) or at home (41.19%). The study also found that the highest age-adjusted mortality rate (AAMR) for HCC was observed among male patients, particularly among those identified as Asian or Pacific Islander. Variations in AAMR were determined based on the level of urbanization or rurality of the area, with higher rates observed in more densely populated and urbanized regions. In contrast, less urbanized and populated areas experienced a profound increase in AAMR over the past two decades.

Conclusion

The HCC-related AAMRs have worsened over time for most ethnic groups, except for Asian or Pacific Islanders, which showed a reduction in APC despite having the worst AAMR. Although rural and less densely populated areas have substantially increased AAMR over the past two decades, more urbanized areas continued to have higher AAMR rates.

Review article: Telecare in gastroenterology-Within the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond

BACKGROUND

Telehealth is a growing model of care, greatly accelerated with the demands of the COVID-19 pandemic. Telecare is a synchronous audio-visual or audio-only format of health delivery.

AIMS

To evaluate the existing literature on telecare within adult gastroenterology subspecialties to determine if outcomes are comparable to traditional in-person consultations and to highlight the Pokapū Network, a local initiative in the Lakes Region of New Zealand, amongst these international findings.

METHODS

We completed an OVID MEDLINE search using the terms gastroenterology, endoscopy, digestive system, inflammatory bowel disease, functional, hepatology, liver, telemedicine, telehealth, videoconferencing, remote consultation, video clinic and telephone clinic.

RESULTS

Patients showed positive attitudes towards telecare and, in several reports, would elect to have telecare consults in the future. Telecare reduces travel time and out-of-pocket costs for patients and the need for patients to take time off work. Generally, patients engaging with telecare show equivalent health outcomes to patients engaging with traditional models of care. Patients from ethnic minority groups or lower socio-economic backgrounds, or who are older, are less likely to complete a 'successful' telecare consult.

CONCLUSION

Telecare is a useful model of care to allow gastroenterology centres to function within the context of COVID-19 isolation and beyond. It has significant benefits for patients who face geographical and financial barriers to accessing healthcare. Telecare models such as the Pokapū Network hold promise in reducing inequities for gastroenterology patients. Such models must be introduced with consideration of digital disparities that exist amongst patients to avoid worsening the digital divide.

Rates, patterns, and predictors of specialty palliative care consultation among patients with acute-on-chronic liver failure

Background & Aims

There is growing acceptance that principles of palliative care should be integrated into the management of serious illnesses affecting the liver, such as acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF). However, rates, patterns, and predictors of specialty palliative care consultation among patients with ACLF have not been well-described.

Methods

We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients hospitalized with ACLF between 1/1/2008 and 12/31/2018 using the VOCAL cohort. Patients were followed until 6/2021. We used mixed-effects regression analyses to identify significant patient and facility factors associated with palliative care consultation. We examined timing of consultation, the influence of ACLF characteristics, and facility-level variation on receipt of palliative care consultation.

Results

We identified 21,987 patients hospitalized with ACLF, of whom 30.5% received specialty palliative care consultation. Higher ACLF grade (ACLF-2 [odds ratio (OR) 1.82, 95% CI 1.67-1.99], ACLF-3 [OR 3.06, 95% CI 2.76-3.40]), prior specialty palliative care consultation (OR 2.62, 95% CI 2.36-2.91), and hepatocellular carcinoma (OR 2.10, 95% CI 1.89-2.33) were associated with consultation. Consultation occurred latest and closest to the time of death for patients with ACLF-3 compared to ACLF-1 and ACLF-2. Significant facility-level variation in consultation persisted among patients with ACLF-3, despite adjusting for multiple patient and facility factors.

Conclusion

In this large cohort of hospitalized patients with ACLF, specialty palliative care consultation was rare, more common in patients with higher grade ACLF, and tended to occur closer to the time of death for the sickest patients. Greater attention should be placed on earlier integration of palliative care during acute hospitalizations in patients with ACLF.

Impact and implications

Though palliative care consultation is recommended for patients with acute-on-chronic liver failure, there is no data demonstrating how often this occurs during hospitalizations, on a population level. We found that consultation occurs in only 30.5% of patients and occurs later for patients with grade 3 acute-on-chronic liver failure. Our data should provoke clinicians to urgently consider quality improvement efforts to integrate palliative care into the management of these seriously ill patients.

Association between neighborhood-based material deprivation and liver transplant waitlist registrants demographics and mortality

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Liver transplantation for alcohol-related liver disease (ARLD) has increased. We examined temporal trends in ARLD listing practices by neighborhood deprivation and evaluated the impact of neighborhood deprivation on waitlist mortality.

METHODS

We included all adults > 18 years listed 2008-2019 in the UNOS registry. Our primary exposure was the neighborhood socioeconomic deprivation index based on patients' listing zip codes. We determined temporal trends in an ARLD listing diagnosis. We modeled ARLD listing diagnosis using logistic regression and waitlist mortality using Cox proportional hazards models.

RESULTS

The waitlist contained an increasing proportion of patients listed with ARLD over the study period; however, this rate increased the least for patients from the most deprived tertile (p < .001). Patients from the most deprived tertile were the least likely to be listed with ARLD (OR: .97, 95CI: .95-.98). In our adjusted model, patients from the most deprived tertile had an increased hazard of waitlist mortality (OR: 1.10, 95CI: 1.06-1.14).

CONCLUSION

Neighborhood deprivation was associated with a decreased likelihood of being listed with ARLD, suggesting that transplant for ARLD is inequitably available. The increased mortality associated with neighborhood deprivation demands future work to uncover the underlying reasons for this disparity.

Characterization of social determinants of health of a liver transplant referral population

Disparities exist in referral and access to the liver transplant (LT) waitlist, and social determinants of health (SDOH) are increasingly recognized as important factors driving health inequities, including in LT. The SDOH of potential transplant candidates is therefore important to characterize when designing targeted interventions to promote equity in access to LT. Yet, it is uncertain how a transplant center should approach this issue, characterize SDOH, identify disparities, and use these data to inform interventions. We performed a retrospective study of referrals for first-time, single-organ LT to our center from 2016 to 2020. Addresses were geoprocessed and mapped to the corresponding county, census tract, and census block group to assess their geospatial distribution, identify potential disparities in referrals, and characterize their communities across multiple domains of SDOH to identify potential barriers to evaluation and selection. We identified variability in referral patterns and areas with disproportionately low referrals, including counties in the highest quartile of liver disease mortality (9%) and neighborhoods in the highest quintile of socioeconomic deprivation (17%) and quartile of poverty (21%). Black individuals were also under-represented compared with expected state demographics (12% vs. 18%). Among the referral population, several potential barriers to evaluation and selection for LT were identified, including poverty, educational attainment, access to healthy food, and access to technology. This approach to the characterization of a transplant center's referral population by geographic location and associated SDOH demonstrates a model for identifying disparities in a referral population and potential barriers to evaluation that can be used to inform targeted interventions for disparities in LT access.

Geographic disparities in access to liver transplantation

Since the Final Rule regarding transplantation was published in 1999, organ distribution policies have been implemented to reduce geographic disparity. While a recent change in liver allocation, termed acuity circles, eliminated the donor service area as a unit of distribution to decrease the geographic disparity of waitlisted patients to liver transplantation, recently published results highlight the complexity of addressing geographic disparity. From geographic variation in donor supply, as well as liver disease burden and differing model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) scores of candidates and MELD scores necessary to receive liver transplantation, to the urban-rural disparity in specialty care access, and to neighborhood deprivation (community measure of socioeconomic status) in liver transplant access, addressing disparities of access will require a multipronged approach at the patient, transplant center, and national level. Herein, we review the current knowledge of these disparities-from variation in larger (regional) to smaller (census tract or zip code) levels to the common etiologies of liver disease, which are particularly affected by these geographic boundaries. The geographic disparity in liver transplant access must balance the limited organ supply with the growing demand. We must identify patient-level factors that contribute to their geographic disparity and incorporate these findings at the transplant center level to develop targeted interventions. We must simultaneously work at the national level to standardize and share patient data (including socioeconomic status and geographic social deprivation indices) to better understand the factors that contribute to the geographic disparity. The complex interplay between organ distribution policy, referral patterns, and variable waitlisting practices with the proportion of high MELD patients and differences in potential donor supply must all be considered to create a national policy strategy to address the inequities in the system.

Access to technology to support telehealth in areas without specialty care for liver disease

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Telehealth may be a successful strategy to increase access to specialty care for liver disease, but whether the areas with low access to care and a high burden of liver-related mortality have the necessary technology access to support a video-based telehealth strategy to expand access to care is unknown.

APPROACH AND RESULTS

Access to liver disease specialty care was defined at the county level as <160.9 km (100 miles) from a liver transplant (LT) center or presence of local gastroenterology (GI). Liver-related mortality rates were compared by access to care, and access to technology was compared by degree of access to care and burden of liver-related mortality. Counties with low access to liver disease specialty care had higher rates of mortality from liver disease, and this was highest in areas both >160.9 km from an LT center and without local GI. These counties were more rural, had higher poverty, and had decreased access to devices and internet at broadband speeds. Technology access was lowest in areas with low access to care and the highest burden of liver-related mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Areas with poor access to liver disease specialty care have a greater burden of liver-related mortality, and many of their residents lack access to technology. Therefore, a telehealth strategy based solely on patient device ownership and internet access will exclude a large proportion of individuals in the areas of highest need. Further work should be done at the local and state levels to design optimal strategies to reach their populations of need.

Evaluation of CirrhoCare® - a digital health solution for home management of individuals with cirrhosis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Individuals with cirrhosis discharged from hospital following acute decompensation are at high risk of new complications. This study aimed to assess the feasibility and potential clinical benefits of remote management of individuals with acutely decompensated cirrhosis using CirrhoCare®.

METHODS

Individuals with cirrhosis with acute decompensation were followed up with CirrhoCare® and compared with contemporaneous matched controls, managed with standard follow-up. Commercially available monitoring devices were linked to the smartphone CirrhoCare® app, for daily recording of heart rate, blood pressure, weight, % body water, cognitive function (CyberLiver Animal Recognition Test [CL-ART] app), self-reported well-being, and intake of food, fluid, and alcohol. The app had 2-way patient-physician communication. Independent external adjudicators assessed the appropriateness of CirrhoCare®-based decisions.

RESULTS

Twenty individuals with cirrhosis were recruited to CirrhoCare® (mean age 59 ± 10 years, 14 male, alcohol-related cirrhosis [80%], mean model for end-stage liver disease-sodium [MELD-Na] score 16.1 ± 4.2) and were not statistically different to 20 contemporaneous controls. Follow-up was 10.1 ± 2.4 weeks. Fifteen individuals showed good engagement (≥4 readings/week), 2 moderate (2-3/week), and 3 poor (<2/week). In a usability questionnaire, the median score was ≥9 for all questions. Five CirrhoCare®-managed individuals had 8 readmissions over a median of 5 (IQR 3.5-11) days, and none required hospitalisation for >14 days. Sixteen other CirrhoCare®-guided patient contacts were made, leading to clinical interventions that prevented further progression. Appropriateness was confirmed by adjudicators. Controls had 13 readmissions in 8 individuals, lasting a median of 7 (IQR 3-15) days with 4 admissions of >14 days. They had 6 unplanned paracenteses compared with 1 in the CirrhoCare® group.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that CirrhoCare® is feasible for community management of individuals with decompensated cirrhosis with good engagement and clinically relevant alerts to new decompensating events. CirrhoCare®-managed individuals have fewer and shorter readmissions justifying larger controlled clinical trials.

IMPACT AND IMPLICATIONS

As the burden of cirrhosis grows worldwide, increasing demands are being placed on limited healthcare resources, necessitating the adoption of more sustainable care models that allow for at-home patient management. The CirrhoCare® management system was developed to fill this care gap, deploying a novel combination of hardware, apps, and algorithms, to monitor and intervene in individuals at risk of new decompensation. This study highlights the possibility of reducing hospital readmissions for cirrhosis by optimising specialist community care, reducing the need for interventions such as paracentesis, while providing a more sustainable care pathway that is acceptable to patients. However, given the pilot and non-randomised nature of this study, the outcomes require further validation in a larger randomised controlled trial, to assess both clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. Moreover, the data generated will also facilitate data modelling and further research to refine the CirrhoCare® algorithms to increase their detection sensitivity and utility.

Does the distance between residency and implanting center affect the outcome of patients supported by left ventricular assist devices? A multicenter Italian study on radial mechanically assisted circulatory support (MIRAMACS) analysis

BACKGROUND

Patients with LVAD require continuous monitoring and care, and since Implanting Centers (ICs) are more experienced in managing LVAD patients than other healthcare facilities, the distance between patient residency and IC could negatively affect the outcomes.

METHODS

Data of patients discharged after receiving an LVAD implantation between 2010 and 2021 collected from the MIRAMACS database were retrospectively analyzed. The population was divided into two groups: A (n = 175) and B (n = 141), according to the distance between patient residency and IC ≤ or >90 miles. The primary endpoint was freedom from Adverse Events (AEs), a composite outcome composed of death, cerebrovascular accident, hospital admission because of GI bleeding, infection, pump thrombosis, and right ventricular failure. Secondary endpoints were incidences of mortality and complications. All patients were followed-up regularly, according to participating center protocols.

RESULTS

Baseline clinical characteristics and indications for LVAD did not differ between the two groups. The mean duration of support was 25.5 ± 21 months for Group A and 25.7 ± 20 months for Group B (p = 0.79). At 3 years, freedom from AEs was similar between Group A and Group B (p = 0.36), and there were no differences in rates of mortality and LVAD-related complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Distance from the IC does not represent a barrier to successful outcomes as long as regular and continuous follow-up is provided.

Black race is independently associated with underutilization of transplantation for clinical T1 hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a leading cause of cancer mortality. Operative management of early disease includes ablation, resection, and transplantation. We compared the operative management of early-stage HCC in patients stratified by race.

METHODS

We identified patients with cT1 HCC and Charlson-Deyo score 0-1 in the National Cancer Database (2004-2016). We compared operative/non-operative management by race, adjusting for clinicodemographic variables. We performed marginal standardization of logistic regression to ascertain adjusted probabilities of resection or transplantation in patients under 70 years of age with insurance.

RESULTS

A total of 25,029 patients were included (White = 20,410; Black = 4619). After adjusting for clinico demographic variables, Black race was associated with a lower likelihood of undergoing operative intervention (OR 0.89,p = 0.009). Black patients were more likely to undergo resection (OR 1.23,p < 0.001) and less likely to undergo transplantation (OR 0.60,p < 0.001). Marginal standardization models demonstrated Black race was associated with increased probability of resection in patients >50yrs, with private insurance/Medicare, and lower probability of transplantation regardless of age or insurance payor.

CONCLUSION

Black race is associated with lower rates of hepatic transplantation and higher rates of hepatic resection for early HCC regardless of age or insurance payor. The etiology of these disparities is multifactorial and correcting the root causes represents a critical area for improvement.

Impact of Medicaid Expansion on Liver-Related Mortality

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The Affordable Care Act provided the opportunity for states to expand Medicaid for low-income individuals. Not all states adopted Medicaid expansion, and the timing of adoption among expansion states varied. Prior studies have shown that Medicaid expansion improved mortality rates for several chronic conditions. Although there are data on the association between Medicaid expansion on insurance type among patients waitlisted for a liver transplant, there are no published data to date on its impact on liver disease-related mortality in the broader population. We therefore sought to evaluate the association between Medicaid expansion and state-level liver disease-related mortality using a quasi-experimental study design.

METHODS

We evaluated age-adjusted, state-level, liver disease-related mortality rates using the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data. We fit multivariable linear regression models that accounted for sociodemographic, clinical, and access-to-care variables at the state level, and a difference-in-difference estimator to evaluate the association between Medicaid expansion and liver disease-related mortality.

RESULTS

In multivariable linear regression models, there was a significant association between Medicaid expansion and liver disease-related mortality (P = .02). Medicaid expansion was associated with 8.3 (95% CI, 1.6-15.1) fewer deaths from liver disease per 1,000,000 adult residents per year after Medicaid expansion compared with what would have been expected to occur if those states followed the same trajectory as nonexpansion states. The impact of Medicaid expansion translated to 870 fewer liver-related deaths per year in expansion states (4350 in the postexpansion study period from 2014 to 2018).

CONCLUSIONS

These data support the contention that Medicaid expansion has been associated with significantly decreased liver disease-related mortality. Universal Medicaid expansion could further decrease liver disease-related mortality in the United States.

The Impact of Primary Liver Disease and Social Determinants in a Mixed Donor Liver Transplant Program: A Single-Center Analysis

Organ allocation in liver transplantation (LT) remains imperfect. Periodic center reviews ensure programs transparently evaluate the impact of practice on access to transplantation, reflecting, in particular, patient (primary disease, social determinants) and program (deceased versus live donation) factors. Adult Ontario residents waitlisted for first LT at Toronto General Hospital from November 2012 to May 2019 were reviewed. Analyses were performed between distance to transplant center, income, education level, population density and primary liver disease, with LT, deceased donor liver transplant (DDLT), living donor liver transplant (LDLT), and delisting. Of 1735 listed patients, 549 were delisted (32%), while 1071 were transplanted (62%), with 819 DDLT recipients (76%) and 252 LDLT recipients (24%), while 115 (7%) remained actively listed at data census. On univariate analysis, DDLT recipients lived 30% closer (median 39.7 versus 60.6 km; P < 0.001), lived in more populous areas (median 8501.0 versus 6868.5 people in a 1-km radius; P < 0.001), and resided in households that annually earned 10% less (median $92,643.17 versus $102,820.89 Canadian dollars; P < 0.001) compared with LDLT recipients. These findings with population density and income differences between DDLT versus LDLT receival remained significant on multivariate modeling even when accounting for primary liver disease. Primary liver disease was a statistically significant factor on multivariate analyses in LT receival (P = 0.001) as well as DDLT versus LDLT receival (P < 0.001). Of patients listed for end-stage liver disease, more patients with autoimmune cholestatic liver diseases received LDLT (34%-41%) than DDLT (27%-30%); this contrasted with patients with noncholestatic diseases LDLT (8%-19%) versus DDLT (37%-59%) receival (P < 0.001). Review of transplant allocation in a large mixed-donor North American liver transplant program demonstrates how patient social determinants and primary liver disease etiology continue to be significantly associated with ultimate transplantation.

Geographic disparities in transplantation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The Final Rule clearly states that geography should not be a determinant of a chance of a potential candidate being transplanted. There have been multiple concerns about geographic disparities in patients in need of solid organ transplantation. Allocation policy adjustments have been designed to address these concerns, but there is little evidence that the disparities have been solved. The purpose of this review is to describe the main drivers of geographic disparities in solid organ transplantation and how allocation policy changes and other potential actions could impact these inequalities.

RECENT FINDINGS

Geographical disparities have been reported in kidney, pancreas, liver, and lung transplantation. Organ Procurement and Transplant Network has modified organ allocation rules to underplay geography as a key determinant of a candidates' chance of receiving an organ. Thus, heart, lung, and more recently liver and Kidney Allocation Systems have incorporated broader organ sharing to reduce geographical disparities. Whether these policy adjustments will indeed eliminate geographical disparities are still unclear.

SUMMARY

Modern allocation policy focus in patients need, regardless of geography. Innovative actions to further reduce geographical disparities are needed.

Racial Disparity in Liver Transplantation Listing

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have demonstrated disparities in transplantation for women, non-Caucasians, the uninsured or publicly insured, and rural populations. We sought to correlate transplant center characteristics with patient access to the waiting list and liver transplantation. We hypothesized that liver transplant centers vary greatly in providing equitable access to the waiting list and liver transplantation.

STUDY DESIGN

Center-specific, adult, deceased-donor liver transplant and waitlist data for the years 2013 to 2018 were obtained from the United Network for Organ Sharing. Waitlist race/ethnicity distributions from liver transplant centers performing ≥ 250 transplants over this period (n = 109) were compared with those of their donor service area, as calculated from 5-year US Census Bureau estimates of 2017. Center-specific characteristics correlating with disparities were analyzed using a linear regression model with a log transformed outcome.

RESULTS

Non-Hispanic Blacks (NHBs) are under-represented in liver transplant listing compared with center donation service area (88/109, 81%), whereas, non-Hispanic Whites are over-represented (65/109, 58%) (p < 0.0001). Hispanics were also under-represented on the waitlist at the majority of transplant centers (68/109, 62%) (p = 0.02). Although the racial/ethnic distribution of transplantation is more reflective of the waitlist, there is a higher than expected rate of transplantation for NHBs compared to the waitlist. Predictors of disparity in listing include percentage of transplant recipients at the center who had private insurance, racial composition of the donation service area, and the distance recipients had to travel for transplant.

CONCLUSIONS

Non-Hispanic Blacks are listed for liver transplantation less than would be expected. Once listed, however, racial disparities in transplantation are greatly diminished. Improvements in access to adequate health insurance appear to be essential to diminishing disparities in access to this life-saving care.

County Differences in Liver Mortality in the United States: Impact of Sociodemographics, Disease Risk Factors, and Access to Care

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Data have demonstrated state-wide variability in mortality rates from liver disease (cirrhosis + hepatocellular carcinoma), but data are lacking at the local level (eg, county) to identify factors associated with variability in liver disease-related mortality and hotspots of liver disease mortality.

METHODS

We used Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Wide-ranging Online Data for Epidemiologic Research data from 2009 to 2018 to calculate county-level, age-adjusted liver disease-related death rates. We fit multivariable linear regression models to adjust for county-level covariates related to demographics (ie, race and ethnicity), medical comorbidities (eg, obesity), access to care (eg, uninsured rate), and geographic (eg, distance to closest liver transplant center) variables. We used optimized hotspot analysis to identify clusters of liver disease mortality hotspots based on the final multivariable models.

RESULTS

In multivariable models, 61% of the variability in among-county mortality was explained by county-level race/ethnicity, poverty, uninsured rates, distance to the closest transplant center, and local rates of obesity, diabetes, and alcohol use. Despite adjustment, significant within-state variability in county-level mortality rates was found. Of counties in the top fifth percentile (ie, highest mortality) of fully adjusted mortality, 60% were located in 3 states: Oklahoma, Texas, and New Mexico. Adjusted mortality rates were highly spatially correlated, representing 5 clusters: South Florida; Appalachia and the eastern part of the Midwest; Texas and Oklahoma; New Mexico, Arizona, California, and southern Oregon; and parts of Washington and Montana.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data demonstrate significant intrastate differences in liver disease-related mortality, with more than 60% of the variability explained by patient demographics, clinical risk factors for liver disease, and access to specialty liver care.

A Review of the Current State of Liver Transplantation Disparities

Equity in access is one of the core goals of the Organ Procurement and Transplant Network (OPTN). However, disparities in liver transplantation have been described since the passage of the National Organ Transplant Act, which established OPTN in the 1980s. During the past few decades, several efforts have been made by the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) to address disparities in liver transplantation with notable improvements in many areas. Nonetheless, disparities have persisted across insurance type, sex, race/ethnicity, geographic area, and age. African Americans have lower rates of referral to transplant centers, females have lower rates of transplantation from the liver waiting list than males, and public insurance is associated with worse posttransplant outcomes than private insurance. In addition, pediatric candidates and older adults have a disadvantage on the liver transplant waiting list, and there are widespread regional disparities in transplantation. Given the large degree of inequity in liver transplantation, there is a tremendous need for studies to propose and model policy changes that may make the liver transplant system more just and equitable.

Center Variation in Intention-to-Treat Survival Among Patients Listed for Liver Transplant

In the United States, centers performing liver transplant (LT) are primarily evaluated by patient survival within 1 year after LT, but tight clustering of outcomes allows only a narrow window for evaluation of center variation for quality improvement. Alternate measures more relevant to patients and the transplant community are needed. We examined adults listed for LT in the United States, using data submitted to the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients. Intention-to-treat (ITT) survival was defined as survival within 1 year from listing, regardless of transplant. Mixed effects/frailty models were used to assess center variation in ITT survival. Between January 2010 and December 2016, there were 66,428 new listings at 113 centers. Overall, median 1-year ITT survival was 79.8% (interquartile range [IQR], 76.1%-83.4%), whereas 1-year waiting-list (WL) survival was 75.8% (IQR, 71.2%-79.4%), and 1-year post-LT survival was 90.0% (IQR, 87.9%-91.8%). Higher rates of ITT mortality were correlated with increased WL mortality (correlation, r = 0.76), increased post-LT mortality (r = 0.31), lower volume centers (r = -0.34), and lower transplant rate ratio (r = -0.25). Similar patterns were observed in the subgroup of WL candidates listed with Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) ≥25: median 1-year ITT survival was 65.2% (IQR, 60.2%-72.6%), whereas 1-year post-LT survival was 87.5% (IQR, 84.0%-90.9%), and 1-year WL survival was 36.6% (IQR, 27.9%-47.0%). In mixed effects modeling, the transplant center was an independent predictor of ITT survival even after adjustment for age, sex, MELD, and sociodemographic variables. Center variation for ITT survival was larger compared with post-LT survival. The measurement of ITT outcome offers a complementary method to assess center performance. This is a first step toward understanding differences in program quality beyond patient and graft survival after LT.

Most pediatric transplant centers are low volume, adult-focused, and in proximity to higher volume pediatric centers

BACKGROUND

Independent studies provide evidence that low volume pediatric solid organ transplant centers have inferior outcomes compared to high volume pediatric centers. The study assessed whether patients treated at low volume pediatric centers have access to higher volume pediatric centers, which offer potentially better outcomes.

METHODS

We analyzed center specific data on 467 pediatric solid organ transplant centers in the U.S using the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network database from 2002 to 2014. The proximities of low volume pediatric centers to high volume pediatric centers were determined using Maptive, a tool based on Google Maps.

RESULTS

Most low volume pediatric transplant centers focused on transplantation of adults (84% heart, 83% liver, and 93% kidney programs). A majority of low volume pediatric centers (77% for heart, 53% for lung, 68% for liver and 90% for kidney) were within 150 miles of high volume centers. Among all children listed for transplantation, 30.7% were listed in low volume pediatric centers. Most low volume pediatric centers are adult focused and near high volume pediatric centers.

CONCLUSION

We need greater scrutiny of outcomes, particularly waitlist outcomes, of low volume pediatric solid organ transplant centers located close to high volume pediatric solid organ transplant centers.

TYPE OF STUDY AND LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Retrospective Comparative Study, Level III.

Understanding Health Care Utilization and Mortality After Emergency General Surgery in Patients With Underlying Liver Disease

BACKGROUND

Mortality and complications are not well defined nationally for emergency general surgery (EGS) patients presenting with underlying all-cause liver disease (LD).

STUDY DESIGN

We analyzed the 2012-2014 National Inpatient Sample for adults (aged ≥ 18 years) with a primary EGS diagnosis. Underlying LD included International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification codes for alcoholic and viral hepatitis, malignancy, congenital etiologies, and cirrhosis. The primary outcome was mortality; secondary outcomes included complications, operative intervention, and costs.

RESULTS

Of the 6.8 million EGS patients, 358 766 (5.3%) had underlying LD. 59.1% had cirrhosis, 6.7% had portal hypertension, and 13.7% had ascites. Compared with other EGS patients, EGS-LD patients had higher mean costs ($12 847 vs $10 234, P < .001). EGS-LD patients were less likely to have surgery (26.1% vs 37.0%, P < .001) but for those who did, mortality was higher (4.8% vs 1.8%, P < .001). Risk factors for mortality included ascites (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 2.68, P < .001), dialysis (aOR = 3.44, P < .001), sepsis (aOR = 8.97, P < .001), and respiratory failure requiring intubation (aOR = 10.40, P < .001). Odds of death increased in both surgical (aOR = 4.93, P < .001) and non-surgical EGS-LD patients (aOR = 2.56, P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Underlying all-cause LD among EGS patients is associated with increased in-hospital mortality, even in the absence of surgical intervention.

MELD EXCEPTION POINTS PROVIDE AN ENOURMOUS ADVANTAGE FOR RECEIVING A LIVER TRANSPLANT IN BRAZIL

BACKGROUND

Current policy for listing to liver transplant (LT) may place cirrhotic patients without MELD exception points (CIR) in a disadvantageous position if compared to patients enlisted with appealed MELD scores - patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) or special conditions other than hepatocellular carcinoma (SPE). Transplant rates, delisting, and waitlist mortality of CIR, HCC, and SPE candidates were compared.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to counterweight the listing rate and speed of listing of HCC, SPE, and CIR patients. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study comparing the outcomes of patients enlisted for SPE to those of HCC and CIR. In several countries worldwide, SPE patients also receive appealed MELD scores in a similar way of HCC patients.

METHODS

Two cohorts of patients listed for LT in a single institution were evaluated. The first cohort (C1, n=180) included all patients enlisted on August 1st, 2008, and all additional patients listed from this date until July 31st, 2009. The second cohort (C2, n=109) included all patients present on the LT list on October 1st, 2012, and all additional patients listed from this date until May 2014.

RESULTS

In both cohorts, HCC patients had a higher chance of receiving a LT than CIR patients (C1HR =2.05, 95%CI=1.54-2.72, P<0.0001; C2HR =3.17, 95%CI =1.83-5.52, P<0.0001). For C1, 1-year waiting list mortality was 21.6% (30.0% for CIR vs 9.5% for HCC vs 7.1% for SPE) (P<0.001). For C2, 1-year waiting list mortality was 13.3% (25.7% for CIR, 8.3% for HCC, and 4.0% for SPE) (P<0.001). Post-transplant survival was similar among the three groups.

CONCLUSION

Compared to CIR, SPE and HCC patients had lower wait list mortality. CIR patients had the highest waitlist mortality and the lowest odd of LT. Current LT allocation system does not allow equitable organ allocation.

One Hundred Fifty Liver Transplants at a New Program in the Modern Era: The University of Mississippi Experience

From 1991 to 2013, Mississippi was without liver transplant services. In 2013, a new liver transplant program was established at the University of Mississippi Medical Center. Here, we describe our experience with the first 150 transplants over a 4.5-year period. This study is a review of 147 patients who underwent the first 150 liver transplants at the University of Mississippi Medical Center between March 5, 2013, and January 4, 2018. There were no exclusion criteria for this study. Donor, recipient, and outcome variables were analyzed. Recipients were 46% female and 74% white. Age at the time of transplant was 57 [IQR 49–63]. BMI at transplant was 30 [IQR 25–35]. Thirty per cent of transplants were for alcoholic cirrhosis, 25% non-alcoholic steatohepatitis, 24% hepatitis C, and 12% cholestatic. Mean model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) at the time of transplant was 20 [95% confidence interval 19–21] and MELD-Na was 22 [95% confidence interval 20–23]. One-year patient- and graft survival were 89% and 87%, respectively, which were as expected based on Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipient reports after risk adjustment. The data published here verifies it is possible to establish a new liver transplant center in an underserved area previously lacking comprehensive liver care and to achieve results similar to other high-volume centers across the country.

Improving cirrhosis care: The potential for telemedicine and mobile health technologies

Decompensated cirrhosis is a condition associated with significant morbidity and mortality. While there have been significant efforts to develop quality metrics that ensure high-value care of these patients, wide variations in clinical practice exist. In this opinion review, we discuss the quality gap in the care of patients with cirrhosis, including low levels of compliance with recommended cancer screening and other clinical outcome and patient-reported outcome measures. We posit that innovations in telemedicine and mobile health (mHealth) should play a key role in closing the quality gaps in liver disease management. We highlight interventions that have been performed to date in liver disease and heart failure-from successful teleconsultation interventions in the care of veterans with cirrhosis to the use of telemonitoring to reduce hospital readmissions and decrease mortality rates in heart failure. Telemedicine and mHealth can effectively address unmet needs in the care of patients with cirrhosis by increasing preventative care, expanding outreach to rural communities, and increasing high-value care. We aim to highlight the benefits of investing in innovative solutions in telemedicine and mHealth to improve care for patients with cirrhosis and create downstream cost savings.