Donation after cardiac death liver transplantation is marred by inferior outcomes including higher rates of biliary complications and IC as well as increased mortality and graft failure. Despite current federal mandates to increase DCD donation, these serious complications translate into poor outcomes for individuals and increased healthcare costs. These risks should be considered in decisions regarding the utilization of these grafts.
Background-Liver transplantation (LT) from Donation after Cardiac Death (DCD) donors is increasingly being used to address organ shortages. Despite encouraging reports, standard survival metrics have overestimated the effectiveness of DCD livers. We examined the mode, kinetics and predictors of organ failure and resource utilization to more fully characterize outcomes after DCD LT.
Background and Aims
Organ scarcity has resulted in increased utilization of donation after cardiac death (DCD) donors. Prior analysis of patient survival following DCD liver transplantation has been restricted to single institution cohorts and a limited national experience. We compared the current national experience with DCD and DBD livers to better understand survival after transplantation.
Methods
We compared 1,113 DCD and 42,254 DBD recipients from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients database between 1996 and 2007. Patient survival was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier methodology and Cox regression.
Results
DCD recipients experienced worse patient survival compared to DBD recipients (p<0.001). One and three year survival was 82% and 71% for DCD compared to 86% and 77% for DBD recipients. Moreover, DCD recipients required re-transplantation more frequently (DCD 14.7% versus DBD 6.8%, p<0.001), and re-transplantation survival was markedly inferior to survival after primary transplant irrespective of graft type. Amplification of mortality risk was observed when DCD was combined with cold ischemia time > 12hours (HR=1.81), shared organs (HR=1.69), recipient hepatocellular carcinoma (HR=1.80), recipient age >60 years (HR=1.92), and recipient renal insufficiency (HR=1.82).
Conclusions
DCD recipients experience signficantly worse patient survival after transplantation. This increased risk of mortality is comparable in magnitude to, but often exacerbated by other well-established risk predictors. Utilization decisions should carefully consider DCD graft risks in combination with these other factors.
Background
Given high dialysis mortality rates for patients >60 years old, accepting a kidney with a high kidney donor profile index (KDPI) score could enable earlier and potentially preemptive transplantation (preKT). However, evidence regarding the risks of high KDPI allografts in older patients is limited. Our objective was to determine the relative benefit for older patients of KDPI>85% transplant either preemptively or not compared with remaining on the waitlist.
Methods
UNOS data from 2003–2012 for adult deceased donor kidney transplant candidates was analyzed to evaluate patient survival in patients >60 years old for preKT and non-preKT KDPI>85% transplants compared to candidates remaining on the waitlist including patients who received KDPI 0–85% transplants according to multivariate Cox regression models.
Results
In the first year posttransplant for KDPI>85% recipients >60 years old, preKT had a reduced mortality hazard (HR=0.61, 95%CI=0.41–0.90) and non-preKT an increased mortality hazard (HR= 1.15, 95%CI=1.03–1.27) compared with the waitlist including KDPI 0–85% transplant recipients. At 1–2 years and after 2 years, both KDPI >85% groups had significant reductions in mortality (1–2 yrs: preKT HR= 0.38, 95%CI=0.23–0.60 and non-preKT HR= 0.52, 95%CI=0.45–0.61; and 2+ yrs: preKT HR= 0.50, 95%CI=0.38–0.66 and non-preKT HR= 0.64, 95%CI=0.58–0.70, respectively).
Conclusions
PreKT and non-preKT KDPI>85% transplant was associated with lower mortality hazard after the first year compared with the waitlist including KDPI 0–85% transplants in patients >60 years old. Further consideration should be given to increased utilization of high KDPI grafts in older patients with the goal of avoiding or limiting time on dialysis.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.