Impact of recipients' socio-economic status on patient and graft survival after liver transplantation: the IsMeTT experience

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.

Disparities in Liver Transplant Outcomes: Race/Ethnicity and Individual- and Neighborhood-Level Socioeconomic Status

Race/ethnicity and individual-level socioeconomic status (SES) may contribute to health disparities in liver transplant (LT) outcomes. The socioeconomic conditions of a neighborhood may either mitigate or exacerbate these health disparities. This retrospective study investigated the relationship between race/ethnicity, individual- and neighborhood-level SES, and LT outcomes, and whether neighborhood-level SES modified the relationship between individual factors and LT outcomes. Adult individuals who underwent LT between 2010 and 2019 (n = 55,688) were identified from the United Network for Organ Sharing database. Primary exposures were race/ethnicity, education, primary insurance type, and the Social Deprivation Index (SDI) scores. Education and primary insurance type were used as proxies for individual-level SES, while SDI scores were used as a proxy for neighborhood-level SES. The primary outcome was time to occurrence of graft failure or mortality. Cox proportional hazard models were used to examine the associations between the exposures and outcomes. LT recipients who were Black (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.27, p < .0001), completed high school or less (HR: 1.06, p = .002), and had public insurance (HR: 1.14, p < .0001) had a higher rate of graft failure or mortality than those who were White, completed more than high school, and had private insurance, respectively. The SDI scores were not significantly associated with LT outcomes when adjusting for individual factors (HR: 1.02, p = .45) and did not modify the associations between individual factors and LT outcomes. Findings of this study suggest that disparities based on individual factors were not modified by neighborhood-level SES. Tailored interventions targeting the unique needs associated with race/ethnicity and individual-level SES are needed to optimize LT outcomes.

The cost implications of Wilson disease among hospitalized patients: analysis of USA hospitals

BACKGROUND AND AIM

In this study, we used a national cohort of patients with Wilson's disease (WD) to investigate the admissions, mortality rates, and costs over the captured period to assess specific subpopulations at higher burden.

METHODS

Patients with WD were selected using 2016-2019 National Inpatient Sample (NIS). The weighted estimates and patient data were stratified using demographics and medical characteristics. Regression curves were graphed to derive goodness-of-fit for each trend from which R2 and P values were calculated.

RESULTS

Annual total admissions per 100 000 hospitalizations due to WD were 1075, 1180, 1140, and 1330 ( R2  = 0.75; P  = 0.13) from 2016 to 2019. Within the demographics, there was an increase in admissions among patients greater than 65 years of age ( R2  = 0.90; P  = 0.05) and White patients ( R2  = 0.97; P  = 0.02). Assessing WD-related mortality rates, there was an increase in the mortality rate among those in the first quartile of income ( R2  = 1.00; P  < 0.001). The total cost for WD-related hospitalizations was $20.90, $27.23, $24.20, and $27.25 million US dollars for the years 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019, respectively ( R2  = 0.47; P  = 0.32). There was an increasing total cost trend for Asian or Pacific Islander patients ( R2  = 0.90; P  = 0.05). Interestingly, patients with cirrhosis demonstrated a decreased trend in the total costs ( R2  = 0.97; P  = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

Our study demonstrated that certain ethnicity groups, income classes and comorbidities had increased admissions or costs among patients admitted with WD.

Association of Neighborhood Deprivation and Transplant Center Quality with Liver Transplantation Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Social determinants of health can impact the quality of liver transplantation (LT) care. We sought to assess whether the association between neighborhood deprivation and transplant outcomes can be mitigated by receiving care at high-quality transplant centers.

STUDY DESIGN

In this population-based cohort study, patients who underwent LT between 2004 and 2019 were identified in the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients. LT-recipient neighborhoods were identified at the county level and stratified into quintiles relative to Area Deprivation Index (ADI). Transplant center quality was based on the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients 5-tier ranking using standardized transplant rate ratios. Multivariable Cox regression was used to assess the relationship between ADI, hospital quality, and posttransplant survival.

RESULTS

A total of 41,333 recipients (median age, 57.0 [50.0 to 63.0] years; 27,112 [65.4%] male) met inclusion criteria. Patients residing in the most deprived areas were more likely to have nonalcoholic steatohepatitis, be Black, and travel further distances to reach a transplant center. On multivariable analysis, post-LT long-term mortality was associated with low- vs high-quality transplant centers (hazard ratio [HR] 1.19, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.32), as well as among patients residing in high- vs low-ADI neighborhoods (HR 1.25, 95% CI 1.16 to 1.34; both p ≤ 0.001). Of note, individuals residing in high- vs low-ADI neighborhoods had a higher risk of long-term mortality after treatment at a low-quality (HR 1.31, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.62, p = 0.011) vs high-quality (HR 1.12, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.52, p = 0.471) LT center.

CONCLUSIONS

LT at high-quality centers may be able to mitigate the association between posttransplant survival and neighborhood deprivation. Investments and initiatives that increase access to referrals to high-quality centers for patients residing in higher deprivation may lead to better outcomes and help mitigate disparities in LT.

Factors Impacting Survival in Those Transplanted for NASH Cirrhosis: Data From the NailNASH Consortium

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) is the leading indication for liver transplant (LT) in women and the elderly. Granular details into factors impacting survival in this population are needed to optimize management and improve outcomes.

METHODS

Patients receiving LT for NASH cirrhosis from 1997 to 2017 across 7 transplant centers (NailNASH consortium) were analyzed. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality, and causes of death were enumerated. All outcomes were cross referenced with United Network for Organ Sharing and adjudicated at each individual center. Cox regression models were constructed to elucidate clinical factors impacting mortality.

RESULTS

Nine hundred thirty-eight patients with a median follow-up of 3.8 years (interquartile range, 1.60-7.05 years) were included. The 1-, 3-, 5-, 10-, and 15-year survival of the cohort was 93%, 88%, 83%, 69%, and 46%, respectively. Of 195 deaths in the cohort, the most common causes were infection (19%), cardiovascular disease (18%), cancer (17%), and liver-related (11%). Inferior survival was noted in patients >65 years. On multivariable analysis, age >65 (hazard ratio [HR], 1.70; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04-2.77; P = .04), end-stage renal disease (HR, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.04-2.31; P = .03), black race (HR, 5.25; 95% CI, 2.12-12.96; P = .0003), and non-calcineurin inhibitors-based regimens (HR, 2.05; 95% CI, 1.19-3.51; P = .009) were associated with increased mortality. Statin use after LT favorably impacted survival (HR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.19-0.75; P = .005).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite excellent long-term survival, patients transplanted for NASH at >65 years or with type 2 diabetes mellitus at transplant had higher mortality. Statin use after transplant attenuated risk and was associated with improved survival across all subgroups, suggesting that careful patient selection and implementation of protocol-based management of metabolic comorbidities may further improve clinical outcomes.

Pre-transplant Social Adaptability Index and clinical outcomes in renal transplantation: The Swiss Transplant Cohort study

BACKGROUND

The impact of pre-transplant social determinants of health on post-transplant outcomes remains understudied. In the United States, poor clinical outcomes are associated with underprivileged status, as assessed by the Social Adaptability Index (SAI), a composite score of education, employment status, marital status, household income, and substance abuse. Using data from the Swiss Transplant Cohort Study (STCS), we determined the SAI's predictive value regarding two post-transplant outcomes: all-cause mortality and return to dialysis.

METHODS

Between 2012 and 2018, we included adult renal transplant patients (aged ≥ 18 years) with pre-transplant assessment SAI scores, calculated from a STCS Psychosocial Questionnaire. Time to all-cause mortality and return to dialysis were predicted using Cox regression.

RESULTS

Of 1238 included patients (mean age: 53.8 ± 13.2 years; 37.9% female; median follow-up time: 4.4 years [IQR: 2.7]), 93 (7.5%) died and 57 (4.6%) returned to dialysis. The SAI's hazard ratio was 0.94 (95%CI: 0.88-1.01; p = .09) for mortality and 0.93 (95%CI: 0.85-1.02; p = .15) for return to dialysis.

CONCLUSIONS

In contrast to most published studies on social deprivation, analysis of this Swiss sample detected no significant association between SAI score and mortality or return to dialysis.

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.

Ethical Issues Raised by the Media Portrayal of Adolescent Transplant Refusals

Cases of adolescents in organ failure who refuse solid organ transplant are not common, but several have been discussed in the media in the United States and the United Kingdom. Using the framework developed by Buchanan and Brock for surrogate decision-making, I examine what role the adolescent should morally play when deciding about therapy for life-threatening conditions. I argue that the greater the efficacy of treatment, the less voice the adolescent (and the parent) should have. I then consider how refusals of highly effective transplant cases are similar to and different from refusals of other lifesaving therapies (eg, chemotherapy for leukemia), which is more commonly discussed in the media and medical literature. I examine whether organ scarcity and the need for lifelong immunosuppression justify differences in whether the state intervenes when an adolescent and his or her parents refuse a transplant. I argue that the state, as parens patriae, has an obligation to provide the social supports needed for a successful transplant and follow-up treatment plan, although family refusals may be permissible when the transplant is experimental or of low efficacy because of comorbidities or other factors. I conclude by discussing the need to limit media coverage of pediatric treatment refusals.

Post Liver Transplantation Survival and Related Prognostic Factors among Adult Recipients in Tehran Liver Transplant Center; 2002-2019

BACKGROUND

Liver transplantation is a standard treatment for patients with end-stage liver disease (ESLD). However, with increasing demand for this treatment and limited resources, it is available only to patients who are more likely to survive. The primary aim was to determine prognostic factors for survival.

METHODS

We collected data from 597 adult patients with ESLD, who received a single organ and initial orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) in our center between 20 March 2008 and 20 March 2018. In this historical cohort study, univariate and multiple Cox model were used to determine prognostic factors of survival after transplantation.

RESULTS

After a median follow-up of 825 (0-3889) days, 111 (19%) patients died. Survival rates were 88%, 85%, 82% and 79% at 90 days, 1 year, 3 years, and 5 years, respectively. Older patients (HR = 1.27; 95% CI: 1.01-1.59), presence of pre-OLT ascites (HR = 2.03; 95% CI: 1.16-3.57), pre-OLT hospitalization (HR = 1.88; 95% CI:1.02-3.46), longer operative time (HR = 1.006; 95% CI: 1.004-1.008), post-OLT dialysis (HR = 3.51; 95% CI: 2.07-5.94), cancer (HR = 2.69; 95% CI: 1.23-5.89) and AID (HR = 2.04; 95% CI: 1.17-3.56) as underlying disease versus hepatitis, and higher pre-OLT creatinine (HR = 1.67; 95% CI: 1.10-2.52) were associated with decreased survival.

CONCLUSION

In this center, not only are survival outcomes excellent, but also younger patients, cases with better pre-operative health conditions, and those without complications after OLT have superior survival.

Survival Outcomes After Liver Transplantation in Elderly Patients: A Single-Center Retrospective Analysis

AIM

This study aims to evaluate survival rates in elderly patients after liver transplantation (LT) and to analyze the factors associated with mortality.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Our study includes 535 patients over the age of 18 who had undergone LT in our clinic between June 2004 and January 2018. Data were collected prospectively and scanned retrospectively. Data concerning the patients' age, sex, LT indication, Child-Turcotte-Pugh score, Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score, presence of hepatocellular cancer (HCC), coexisting disease, LT types, and post-transplant survival were investigated. The patients were grouped under 2 categories (18-59 years of age and 60 years of age and over) and were compared in terms of their characteristics. In patients aged 60 and over, the causes of mortality and related factors were investigated.

RESULTS

The study included 535 patients, 458 (85.6%) of whom were between 18 and 59 years of age and 77 (14.4%) were over 60 years of age. The median follow-up period was 86.7 (1 to 247) months. The elderly group's survival rate was significantly lower than that of the younger group (P = .002). In elderly patients, survival rates of 1, 3, 5, and 10 years were 67.4%, 56.4%, 53.8%, and 46.1%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

In elderly patients, factors that increase post-LT mortality require thorough consideration. Equally important is the physiological status of the candidates for transplantation. Correct patient selection in the preoperative stage and good postoperative care can provide successful survival results in elderly patients.

Impact of educational levels on survival rate: A cohort study of 2007 living donor liver transplant recipients at a single large center

Among living donor liver transplantation recipients, the impact of educational levels on survival has rarely explored. Thus, the purpose of study is to analyze the survival rate differences across educational levels among recipients who underwent living donor liver transplantation.We retrospectively analyzed 2007 adult recipients who underwent living donor liver transplantation in a single large center. The educational level was divided into three categories: middle school or lower, high school, and college or higher. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality after living donor liver transplantation. Stratified log-rank test and Cox proportional hazard model were employed for statistical analysis.The incidence rates of all-cause mortality were 23.85, 20.19, and 18.75 per 1000 person-year in recipients with middle school or lower, high school, and college or higher education groups, respectively. However, the gender-stratified log-rank test has not shown a statistically significant difference (P = .3107). In the unadjusted model, hazard ratio (HR) was 1.02 [95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.79-1.33] in high school and 1.23 (95% CI = 0.93-1.64) and in middle school or lower educational level, respectively; In the full adjusted model, the HR of high school was 0.98 (95% CI = 0.75-1.28) and the HR of middle school or lower was 1.01 (95% CI = 0.74-1.37).Although study population of this study is large, we could not find significant survival rate differences by the levels of education. Social selection and high compliance rate might contribute to this result.

Socioeconomic Disparities in Adherence and Outcomes After Heart Transplant: A UNOS (United Network for Organ Sharing) Registry Analysis

BACKGROUND

There is mixed evidence of racial and socioeconomic disparities in heart transplant outcomes. Their underlying cause-and whether individual- or community-level traits are most influential-remains unclear. The current study aimed to characterize socioeconomic disparities in outcomes and identify time trends and mediators of these disparities.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We used United Network for Organ Sharing registry data and included 33 893 adult heart transplant recipients between 1994 and 2014. Socioeconomic status (SES) indicators included insurance, education, and neighborhood SES measured using a composite index. Black race and multiple indicators of low SES were associated with the primary outcome of death or retransplant, independent of baseline clinical characteristics. Blacks had lower HLA and race matching, but further adjustment for these and other graft characteristics only slightly attenuated the association with black race (HR, 1.25 after adjustment). This and the associations with neighborhood SES (HR, 1.19 for lowest versus highest decile), Medicare (HR, 1.17), Medicaid (HR, 1.29), and college education (HR, 0.90) remained significant after full adjustment. When comparing early (1994-2000) and late (2001-2014) cohorts, the disparities associated with the middle (second and third) quartiles significantly decreased over time, but those associated with lowest SES quartile and black race persisted. Low neighborhood SES was also associated with higher risks of noncompliance (HR, 1.76), rejection (HR, 1.28), hospitalization (HR, 1.13), and infection (HR, 1.10).

CONCLUSIONS

Racial and socioeconomic disparities exist in heart transplant outcomes, but the latter may be narrowing over time. These disparities are not explained by differences in clinical or graft characteristics.

Predictors of Liver Transplant Patient Survival

Objective:

Liver transplantation is a costly and risky procedure, representing 25 050 procedures worldwide in 2013, with 6729 procedures performed in the United States in 2014. Considering the scarcity of organs and uncertainty regarding prognosis, limited studies address the variety of risk factors before transplantation that might contribute to predicting patient’s survival and therefore developing better models that address a holistic view of transplant patients. This critical review aimed to identify predictors of liver transplant patient survival included in large-scale studies and assess the gap in risk factors from a holistic approach using the Wellbeing Model and the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement.

Data Source:

Search of the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Medline, and PubMed from the 1980s to July 2014.

Study Selection:

Original longitudinal large-scale studies, of 500 or more subjects, published in English, Spanish, or Portuguese, which described predictors of patient survival after deceased donor liver transplantation.

Data Extraction:

Predictors were extracted from 26 studies that met the inclusion criteria.

Data Synthesis:

Each article was reviewed and predictors were categorized using a holistic framework, the Wellbeing Model (health, community, environment, relationship, purpose, and security dimensions).

Conclusions:

The majority (69.7%) of the predictors represented the Wellbeing Model Health dimension. There were no predictors representing the Wellbeing Dimensions for purpose and relationship nor emotional, mental, and spiritual health. This review showed that there is rigorously conducted research of predictors of liver transplant survival; however, the reported significant results were inconsistent across studies, and further research is needed to examine liver transplantation from a whole-person perspective.

Quality of life in liver transplant recipients and the influence of sociodemographic factors

Abstract OBJECTIVE To verify the influence of sociodemographic factors on the quality of life of patients after liver transplant. METHOD Cross-sectional study with 150 patients who underwent liver transplant at a referral center. A sociodemographic instrument and the Liver Disease Quality of Life questionnaire were applied. The analysis of variance (ANOVA) was performed, as well as multiple comparisons by the Tukey test and Games-Howell tests when p <0.05. RESULTS Old age had influence on domains of symptoms of liver disease (p = 0.049), sleep (p = 0.023) and sexual function (p = 0.03). Men showed better significant mean values than women for the loneliness dimension (p = 0.037). Patients with higher educational level had higher values for the domain of stigma of liver disease (p = 0.014). There was interference of income in the domains of quality of social interaction (p = 0.033) and stigma of the disease (p = 0.046). CONCLUSION In half of the quality of life domains, there was influence of some sociodemographic variable.

A moral dilemma argument against clinical trials of incentives for kidney donation

Commercial transplant tourism results in significant harm to both kidney donors and recipients. However, proponents of incentives for kidney donation assert that proper oversight of the process prevents these harms and also that transplant numbers can be safely increased so that the moral burden of poor end-stage kidney disease outcomes can be alleviated. In a moral dilemma analysis, the principle of preventing donor harm can be dissociated from the principles of providing benefits to the recipient and to society. It is plausible that an incentivized donor is fundamentally different from an uncompensated donor. Incentivized donors can experience harms unrelated to lack of regulation because their characteristics are determined by the incentive superimposed upon a poverty circumstance. Moreover, creating a system of incentivized donation without established national registries for capturing all long-term donor outcomes would be morally inconsistent, since without prior demonstration that donor outcomes are not income or wealth-dependent, a population of incentivized donors cannot be morally created in a clinical trial. Socioeconomic factors adversely affect outcome in other surgical populations, and interventions on income or wealth in these populations have not been studied. Coercion will be increased in families not affected by kidney disease, where knowledge of a new income source and not of a potential recipient is the incentive. In the case of elective surgery such as kidney donation, donor non-maleficence trumps donor autonomy, recipient beneficence, and beneficence to society when there is a conflict among these principles. Yet, we are still faced with the total moral burden of end-stage kidney disease, which belongs to the society that cannot provide enough donor kidneys. Acting according to one arm of the dilemma to prevent donor harm does not erase obligations towards the other, to provide recipient benefit. To resolve the moral burden, as moral agents, we must rearrange our institutions by increasing available donor organs from other sources. The shortage of donor kidneys creates a moral burden for society, but incentives for donation will only increase the total moral burden of end-stage kidney disease.

Patient education level affects functionality and long term mortality after major lower extremity amputation

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to examine the relationship between patient education level and 5-year mortality after major lower extremity amputation.

METHODS

The records of all patients who underwent above-knee or below-knee amputation at the Nashville Veterans Affairs Medical Center by the vascular surgery service between January 2000 and August 2006 were retrospectively reviewed. Formal levels of education of the study patients were recorded. Outcomes were compared between those patients who had completed high school and those who had not. Bivariate analysis using χ(2) and Student's t tests and multivariate logistic regression were performed.

RESULTS

Five-year mortality for patients who had completed high school was lower than for those who had not completed high school (62.6% vs 84.3%, P = .001), even after adjusting for important clinical factors (odds ratio for death, .377; 95% confidence interval, .164-.868; P = .022).

CONCLUSION

Patients with less education have increased long-term mortality after lower extremity amputation.