Organ utilization from increased infectious risk donors: An observational study

Implications of drug intoxication on donor utilization and outcomes in liver transplantation

INTRODUCTION

This study evaluates the implications of drug intoxication (DI) on donor utilization and outcomes in liver transplantation (LT).

METHODS

The UNOS STAR database was evaluated for all potential donors and adult, first-time, whole LT between 2005 and 2019. Logistic regression analyses evaluated liver utilization; proportional hazards modeling assessed risk of 1-year graft loss.

RESULTS

A total of 132 783 potential donors (10 205, 7.7% from DI), and 90 612 adult LT were identified (7490, 8.3% from DI). DI donors had median age 32 years (IQR 26-40 years, p < .001), were 42.6% female (n = 4346), and 15.5% were DCD donors (n = 1583). Utilization of DI donors changed over time, such that by 2015-2019 they were the most likely donor cause of death (COD) to be utilized. Among LT recipients, there were insignificant differences (<2% variance) in age, gender, ethnicity, and etiology of liver disease according to donor COD. Recipients with MELD scores >30 more frequently received grafts from donors with trauma (23.8%) and DI (21.8%) versus cardiovascular (20.0%) and CVA/stroke (19.9%, p < .001). Among DBD donors, DI-COD was associated with superior 1-year graft survival compared to donors from trauma (HR 1.172, 95% CI 1.057-1.300) and CVA/stroke (HR 1.404, 95% CI 1.264-1.561, p < .001). Donor COD was not significantly associated with 1-year graft loss among DCD donors.

CONCLUSIONS

There is an increased likelihood of donor utilization when COD is drug overdose and an increased likelihood of 1-year graft survival compared to donors from trauma, CVA/stroke, and other COD.

Successful Implementation of an Increased Viral Risk Donor Waiting List for Preconsented Kidney Transplant Candidates in Victoria, Australia

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

Increased viral risk donors (IVRDs) with increased risk behaviors for blood-borne virus infection and negative nucleic acid testing have a low absolute risk of “window period” infection. Utilization and allocation of IVRD organs differ between jurisdictions.

New insights into the rational use of HCV+ organs worldwide

Hepatitis C (HCV) is a worldwide health problem. Effective therapies for HCV infection, coupled with an increase in deceased donors due to the opioid epidemic, have led to the broader availability and the use of HCV-infected donor organs, including HCV nucleic acid test-positive (NAT+) donors in HCV-negative recipients. In this review, we discuss the prevalence of HCV infection, trends in the use of HCV-infected donors, and outcomes for those who receive HCV-seropositive or HCV NAT+ donor organs. We discuss management considerations such as hepatitis B reactivation, selection of the optimal direct-acting antiviral regimen, and potential complications. We also present a framework for the rational use of HCV-infected donor organs in the future.

National Variation in Increased Infectious Risk Kidney Offer Acceptance

BACKGROUND

Despite providing survival benefit, increased risk for infectious disease (IRD) kidney offers are declined at 1.5 times the rate of non-IRD kidneys. Elucidating sources of variation in IRD kidney offer acceptance may highlight opportunities to expand use of these life-saving organs.

METHODS

To explore center-level variation in offer acceptance, we studied 6765 transplanted IRD kidneys offered to 187 transplant centers between 2009 and 2017 using Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients data. We used multilevel logistic regression to determine characteristics associated with offer acceptance and to calculate the median odds ratio (MOR) of acceptance (higher MOR indicates greater heterogeneity).

RESULTS

Higher quality kidneys (per 10 units kidney donor profile index; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.94; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.92-0.95), higher yearly volume (per 10 deceased donor kidney transplants; aOR, 1.08, 95% CI, 1.06-1.10), smaller waitlist size (per 100 candidates; aOR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.95-0.98), and fewer transplant centers in the donor service area (per center; aOR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.85-0.91) were associated with greater odds of IRD acceptance. Adjusting for donor and center characteristics, we found wide heterogeneity in IRD offer acceptance (MOR, 1.96). In other words, if listed at a center with more aggressive acceptance practices, a candidate could be 2 times more likely to have an IRD kidney offer accepted.

CONCLUSIONS

Wide national variation in IRD kidney offer acceptance limits access to life-saving kidneys for many transplant candidates.

Attitudes of Liver Transplant Candidates Toward Organs From Increased-Risk Donors

Increased-risk donor (IRD) organs make up a significant proportion of the deceased organ donor pool but may be declined by patients on the waiting list for various reasons. We conducted a survey of patients awaiting a liver transplant to determine the factors leading to the acceptance of an IRD organ as well as what strategies could increase the rate of acceptance. Adult liver transplant candidates who were outpatients completed a survey of 51 questions on a 5-point Likert scale with categories related to demographics, knowledge of IRDs, and likelihood of acceptance. A total of 150 transplant candidates completed the survey (age 19-80 years). Male patients constituted 67.3%. Many patients (58.7%) had postsecondary education. Only 23.3% of patients had a potential living donor, and 58/144 (40.3%) were not optimistic about receiving an organ in the next 3 months. The overall IRD organ acceptance rate was 41.1%, whereas 26.2% said they would decline an IRD organ. Women were more likely to accept an IRD organ (54.3% versus 34.7%; P = 0.02). Those who had a college education or higher tended to have lower IRD organ acceptability (28.3% versus 47.4%; P = 0.07). Acceptability also increased as the specified transmission risk of human immunodeficiency virus or hepatitis C virus decreased (P < 0.001). Patients were also more likely to accept an IRD organ if they were educated on the benefits of IRD organs (eg, knowledge that an IRD organ was of better quality increased overall acceptance from 41.1% to 63.3%; P < 0.001). Our survey provides insight into liver transplant candidates who would benefit from greater education on IRD organs. Strategies targeting specific educational points are likely to increase acceptability.

Is This Organ Donor Safe?: Donor-Derived Infections in Solid Organ Transplantation

Infection is an inevitable complication of solid organ transplantation. Unrecognized infection may be transmitted from a donor and result in disseminated disease in the immunosuppressed host. Recent outbreaks of deceased donor-derived infections resulting in high rates of mortality and severe morbidity have emphasized the need to be cautious in using donors with possible meningoencephalitis. Screening of organ donors for potential transmissible infections is paramount to improving transplantation outcomes.

Is This Organ Donor Safe?: Donor-Derived Infections in Solid Organ Transplantation

Infection is an inevitable complication of solid organ transplantation. Unrecognized infection may be transmitted from a donor and result in disseminated disease in the immunosuppressed host. Recent outbreaks of deceased donor-derived infections resulting in high rates of mortality and severe morbidity have emphasized the need to be cautious in using donors with possible meningoencephalitis. Screening of organ donors for potential transmissible infections is paramount to improving transplantation outcomes.