Laura D. Buccini

The Association of Center Performance Evaluations and Kidney Transplant Volume in the United States

Report cards evaluating transplant center performance have received significant attention in recent years corresponding with the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services issue of the 2007 Conditions of Participation. Our primary aim was to evaluate the association of report card evaluations with transplant center volume. We utilized data from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) along with six consecutive program‐specific reports from January 2007 to July 2009 for adult kidney transplant centers. Among 203 centers, 46 (23%) were low performing (LP) with statistically significantly lower than expected 1‐year graft or patient survival at least once during the study period. Among LP centers, there was a mean decline in transplant volume of 22.4 cases compared to a mean increase of 7.8 transplants among other centers (p = 0.001). Changes in volume between LP and other centers were significant for living, standard and expanded criteria deceased donor (ECD) transplants. LPs had a reduction in use of donors with extended cold ischemia time (p = 0.04) and private pay recipients (p = 0.03). Centers without low performance evaluations were more likely to increase the proportion of overall transplants that were ECDs relative to other centers (p = 0.04). Findings indicate a significant association between reduced kidney transplant volume and low performance report card evaluations.

Sanguineous normothermic machine perfusion improves hemodynamics and biliary epithelial regeneration in donation after cardiac death porcine livers

The effects of normothermic machine perfusion (NMP) on the postreperfusion hemodynamics and extrahepatic biliary duct histology of donation after cardiac death (DCD) livers after transplantation have not been addressed thoroughly and represent the objective of this study. Ten livers (5 per group) with 60 minutes of warm ischemia were preserved via cold storage (CS) or sanguineous NMP for 10 hours, and then they were reperfused for 24 hours with whole blood in an isolated perfusion system to simulate transplantation. In our experiment, the arterial and portal vein flows were stable in the NMP group during the entire reperfusion simulation, whereas they decreased dramatically in the CS group after 16 hours of reperfusion (P < 0.05); these findings were consistent with severe parenchymal injury. Similarly, significant differences existed between the CS and NMP groups with respect to the release of hepatocellular enzymes, the volume of bile produced, and the levels of enzymes released into bile (P < 0.05). According to histology, CS livers presented with diffuse hepatocyte congestion, necrosis, intraparenchymal hemorrhaging, denudated biliary epithelium, and submucosal bile duct necrosis, whereas NMP livers showed very mild injury to the liver parenchyma and biliary architecture. Most importantly, Ki‐67 staining in extrahepatic bile ducts showed biliary epithelial regeneration. In conclusion, our findings advance the knowledge of the postreperfusion events that characterize DCD livers and suggest NMP as a beneficial preservation modality that is able to improve biliary regeneration after a major ischemic event and may prevent the development of ischemic cholangiopathy in the setting of clinical transplantation. Liver Transpl 20:987–999, 2014.

Comorbidity burden and perioperative complications for living kidney donors in the United States.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES Since 1998, 35% of kidney transplants in the United States have been derived from living donors. Research suggests minimal long-term health consequences after donation, but comprehensive studies are limited. The primary objective was to evaluate trends in comorbidity burden and complications among living donors. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS The National Inpatient Sample (NIS) was used to identify donors from 1998 to 2010 (n=69,117). Comorbid conditions, complications, and length of stay during hospitalization were evaluated. Outcomes among cohorts undergoing appendectomies, cholecystectomies and nephrectomy for nonmetastatic carcinoma were compared, and sample characteristics were validated with the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR). Survey regression models were used to identify risk factors for outcomes. RESULTS The NIS captured 89% (69,117 of 77,702) of living donors in the United States. Donor characteristics were relatively concordant with those noted in SRTR (mean age, 40.1 versus 40.3 years [P=0.18]; female donors, 59.0% versus 59.1% [P=0.13]; white donors, 68.4% versus 69.8% [P<0.001] for NIS versus SRTR). Incidence of perioperative complications was 7.9% and decreased from 1998 to 2010 (from 10.1% to 7.6%). Men (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.37; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.20 to 1.56) and donors with hypertension (AOR, 3.35; 95% CI, 2.24 to 5.01) were more likely to have perioperative complications. Median length of stay declined over time (from 3.7 days to 2.5 days), with longer length of stay associated with obesity, depression, hypertension, and pulmonary disorders. Presence of depression (AOR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.04 to 1.12), hypothyroidism (AOR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.04 to 1.11), hypertension (AOR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.27 to 1.49), and obesity (AOR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.03 to 1.11) increased over time. Complication rates and length of stay were similar for patients undergoing appendectomies and cholecystectomies but were less than those with nephrectomies for carcinoma. CONCLUSIONS The NIS is a representative sample of living donors. Complications and length of stay after donation have declined over time, while presence of documented comorbid conditions has increased. Patients undergoing appendectomy and cholecystectomy have similar outcomes during hospitalization. Monitoring the health of living donors remains critically important.

Association between Kidney Transplant Center Performance and the Survival Benefit of Transplantation Versus Dialysis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES Despite the benefits of kidney transplantation, the total number of transplants performed in the United States has stagnated since 2006. Transplant center quality metrics have been associated with a decline in transplant volume among low-performing centers. There are concerns that regulatory oversight may lead to risk aversion and lack of transplantation growth. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS A retrospective cohort study of adults (age≥18 years) wait-listed for kidney transplantation in the United States from 2003 to 2010 using the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients was conducted. The primary aim was to investigate whether measured center performance modifies the survival benefit of transplantation versus dialysis. Center performance was on the basis of the most recent Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients evaluation at the time that patients were placed on the waiting list. The primary outcome was the time-dependent adjusted hazard ratio of death compared with remaining on the transplant waiting list. RESULTS Among 223,808 waitlisted patients, 59,199 and 32,764 patients received a deceased or living donor transplant, respectively. Median follow-up from listing was 43 months (25th percentile=25 months, 75th percentile=67 months), and there were 43,951 total patient deaths. Deceased donor transplantation was independently associated with lower mortality at each center performance level compared with remaining on the waiting list; adjusted hazard ratio was 0.24 (95% confidence interval, 0.21 to 0.27) among 11,972 patients listed at high-performing centers, adjusted hazard ratio was 0.32 (95% confidence interval, 0.31 to 0.33) among 203,797 patients listed at centers performing as expected, and adjusted hazard ratio was 0.40 (95% confidence interval, 0.35 to 0.45) among 8039 patients listed at low-performing centers. The survival benefit was significantly different by center performance (P value for interaction <0.001). CONCLUSIONS Findings indicate that measured center performance modifies the survival benefit of kidney transplantation, but the benefit of transplantation remains highly significant even at centers with low measured quality. Policies that concurrently emphasize improved center performance with access to transplantation should be prioritized to improve ESRD population outcomes.

Association of Candidate Removals From the Kidney Transplant Waiting List and Center Performance Oversight.

Approximately 59 000 kidney transplant candidates have been removed from the waiting list since 2000 for reasons other than transplantation, death, or transfers. Prior studies indicate that low‐performance (LP) center evaluations by the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) are associated with reductions in transplant volume. There is limited information to determine whether performance oversight impacts waitlist management. We used national SRTR data to evaluate outcomes of 315 796 candidates on the kidney transplant waiting list (2007–2014). Compared to centers without LP, rates of waitlist removal (WLR) were higher at centers with LP evaluations (44.6/1000 follow‐up years, 95% confidence interval [CI] 44.0, 45.1 versus 68.0/1000 follow‐up years, 95% CI 66.6, 69.4), respectively, which was consistent after risk adjustment (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR] = 1.59, 95% CI 1.55, 1.63). Candidate mortality following waitlist removal was lower at LP centers (AHR = 0.90, 95% CI 0.87, 0.94). Analyses limited to LP centers indicated a significant increase in WLR (+28.6 removals/1000 follow‐up years, p < 0.001), a decrease in transplant rates (−11.9/1000 follow‐up years, p < 0.001) and a decrease in mortality after removal (−67.5 deaths/1000 follow‐up years, p < 0.001) following LP evaluation. There is a significant association between LP evaluations and transplant center processes of care for waitlisted candidates. Further understanding is needed to determine the impact of performance oversight on transplant center quality of care and patient outcomes.

Critical Factors Associated With Missing Follow-Up Data for Living Kidney Donors in the United States

Follow‐up care for living kidney donors is an important responsibility of the transplant community. Prior reports indicate incomplete donor follow‐up information, which may reflect both donor and transplant center factors. New UNOS regulations require reporting of donor follow‐up information by centers for 2 years. We utilized national SRTR data to evaluate donor and center‐level factors associated with completed follow‐up for donors 2008–2012 (n = 30 026) using multivariable hierarchical logistic models. We compared center follow‐up compliance based on current UNOS standards using adjusted and unadjusted models. Complete follow‐up at 6, 12, and 24 months was 67%, 60%, and 50% for clinical and 51%, 40%, and 30% for laboratory data, respectively, but have improved over time. Donor risk factors for missing laboratory data included younger age 18–34 (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 2.03, 1.58–2.60), black race (AOR = 1.17, 1.05–1.30), lack of insurance (AOR = 1.25, 1.15–1.36), lower educational attainment (AOR = 1.19, 1.06–1.34), >500 miles to center (AOR = 1.78, 1.60–1.98), and centers performing >40 living donor transplants/year (AOR = 2.20, 1.21–3.98). Risk‐adjustment moderately shifted classification of center compliance with UNOS standards. There is substantial missing donor follow‐up with marked variation by donor characteristics and centers. Although follow‐up has improved over time, targeted efforts are needed for donors with selected characteristics and at centers with higher living donor volume. Adding adjustment for donor factors to policies regulating follow‐up may function to provide more balanced evaluation of center efforts.

Comparing Normothermic Machine Perfusion Preservation With Different Perfusates on Porcine Livers From Donors After Circulatory Death.

The utilization of normothermic machine perfusion (NMP) may be an effective strategy to resuscitate livers from donation after circulatory death (DCD). There is no consensus regarding the efficacy of different perfusates on graft and bile duct viability. The aim of this study was to compare, in an NMP porcine DCD model, the preservation potential of three different perfusates. Twenty porcine livers with 60 min of warm ischemia were separated into four preservation groups: cold storage (CS), NMP with Steen solution (Steen; XVIVO Perfusion Inc., Denver, CO), Steen plus red blood cells (RBCs), or whole blood (WB). All livers were preserved for 10 h and reperfused to simulate transplantation for 24 h. During preservation, the NMP with Steen group presented the highest hepatocellular injury. At reperfusion, the CS group had the lowest bile production and the worst hepatocellular injury compared with all other groups, followed by NMP with Steen; the Steen plus RBC and WB groups presented the best functional and hepatocellular injury outcomes, with WB livers showing lower aspartate aminotransferase release and a trend toward better results for most parameters. Based on our results, a perfusate that contains an oxygen carrier is most effective in a model of NMP porcine DCD livers compared with Steen solution. Specifically, WB‐perfused livers showed a trend toward better outcomes compared with Steen plus RBCs.

Hospitalizations Following Living Donor Nephrectomy in the United States

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES Living donors represented 43% of United States kidney donors in 2012. Although research suggests minimal long-term consequences of donation, few comprehensive longitudinal studies for this population have been performed. The primary aims of this study were to examine the incidence, risk factors, and causes of rehospitalization following donation. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS State Inpatient Databases (SID) compiled by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality were used to identify living donors in four different states between 2005 and 2010 (n=4524). Multivariable survival models were used to examine risks for rehospitalization, and patient characteristics were compared with data from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR). Outcomes among patients undergoing appendectomy (n=200,274), cholecystectomy (n=255,231), and nephrectomy for nonmetastatic carcinoma (n=1314) were contrasted. RESULTS The study population was similar to United States donors (for SRTR and SID, respectively: mean age, 41 and 41 years; African Americans, 12% and 10%; women, 60% and 61%). The 3-year incidence of rehospitalization following donation was 11% for all causes and 9% excluding pregnancy-related hospitalizations. After censoring of models for pregnancy-related rehospitalizations, older age (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR], 1.02 per year; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.01 to 1.03), African American race (AHR, 2.16; 95% CI, 1.54 to 3.03), depression (AHR, 1.88; 95% CI, 1.12 to 3.14), hypothyroidism (AHR, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.06 to 2.49), and longer initial length of stay were related to higher rehospitalization rates among donors. Compared with living donors, adjusted risks for rehospitalizations were greater among patients undergoing appendectomy (AHR, 1.58; 95% CI, 1.42 to 1.75), cholecystectomy (AHR, 2.25; 95% CI, 2.03 to 2.50), and nephrectomy for nonmetastatic carcinoma (AHR, 2.95; 95% CI, 2.58 to 3.37). Risks for rehospitalizations were higher among African Americans than whites in each of the surgical groups. CONCLUSIONS The SID is a valuable source for evaluating characteristics and outcomes of living kidney donors that are not available in traditional transplant databases. Rehospitalizations following donor nephrectomy are less than seen with other comparable surgical procedures but are relatively higher among donors who are older, are African American, and have select comorbid conditions. The increased risks for rehospitalizations among African Americans are not unique to living donation.

The Impact of Deceased Donor Kidney Risk Significantly Varies by Recipient Characteristics

As of May 2012, over 92 000 patients were awaiting a solitary kidney transplant in the United States and new waitlist registrations have been rising for over a decade. The decreasing availability of donor organs makes it imperative that organ allocation be as efficient and effective as possible. We performed a retrospective cohort study of adult recipients in the United States (n = 109 392) using Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients data. The primary aim was to evaluate the interaction of donor risk with recipient characteristics on posttransplant outcomes. Donor quality (based on kidney donor risk index [KDRI]) had significant interactions by race, primary diagnosis and age. The hazard of KDRI on overall graft loss in non‐African Americans was 2.16 (95%CI 2.08‐2.25) versus 1.85 (95%CI 1.75‐1.95) in African Americans (p < 0.0001), 2.16 (95%CI 2.08‐2.24) in nondiabetics versus 1.84 (95%CI 1.74‐1.94) in diabetics (p < 0.0001), and 2.22 (95%CI 2.13‐2.32) in recipients <60 years versus 1.83 (95%CI 1.74‐1.92) in recipients ≥60 (p < 0.0001). The relative hazard for diabetics at KDRI = 0.5 was 1.49 but at KDRI = 2.0 the hazard was significantly attenuated to 1.17; among African Americans the respective risks were 1.50 and 1.17 and among recipients 60 and over, it was between 1.64 and 1.22. These findings are critical considerations for informed decision‐making for transplant candidates.

Association between liver transplant center performance evaluations and transplant volume

There has been increased oversight of transplant centers and stagnation in liver transplantation nationally in recent years. We hypothesized that centers that received low performance (LP) evaluations were more likely to alter protocols, resulting in reduced rates of transplants and patients placed on the waiting list. We evaluated the association of LP evaluations and transplant activity among liver transplant centers in the United States using national Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients data (January 2007 to July 2012). We compared the average change in recipient and candidate volume and donor and patient characteristics based on whether the centers received LP evaluations. Of 92 eligible centers, 27 (29%) received at least one LP evaluation. Centers without an LP evaluation (n = 65) had an average increase of 9.3 transplants and 14.9 candidates while LP centers had an average decrease of 39.9 transplants (p < 0.01) and 67.3 candidates (p < 0.01). LP centers reduced the use of older donors, donations with longer cold ischemia, and donations after cardiac death (p‐values < 0.01). There was no association between the change in transplant volume and measured performance (R2 = 0.002, p = 0.91). Findings indicate a strong association between performance evaluations and changes in candidate listings and transplants among liver transplant centers, with no measurable improvement in outcomes associated with reduction in transplant volume.