American Society Of Transplant Surgeons Research Articles

Implementation of Vascularized Composite Allografts in the United States: Recommendations From the ASTS VCA Ad Hoc Committee and the Executive Committee

Like all other areas of transplantation, vascularized composite allografts (VCA) has the capacity to transform the lives of patients, for the better or for the worse. It is this duality that mandates VCA be performed in centers prepared for the intricacies accompanying other transplant procedures. Similarly, the complexities of VCA require that the procedures be driven by surgeons and physicians with experience in the multidisciplinary management of immunocompromised postsurgical patients. Furthermore, the grafts should be considered as organs rather than tissues from a regulatory and a biological standpoint. The ASTS supports the field of VCA and has demonstrated its support and leadership by actively formulating a strategy for its systematic development. The goal of this document is to provide a framework for the prospective, thoughtful realization of VCA in the United States from the American Society of Transplant Surgeons (ASTS) perspective.

Variations in Perioperative Steroid Management among Surgical Subspecialists

Previously we demonstrated consistency in perioperative steroid dosing among colon and rectal surgeons. To determine whether patterns have changed and if dosing schedules differ across surgical specialties, we evaluated multiple specialties. Questionnaires were mailed to members of the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons (CRS) (n = 1523), American Society of Transplant Surgeons (TS) (n = 988), American Society of General Surgeons (GS) (n = 2750), and American Association of Endocrine Surgeons (ES) (n = 278). Surveys addressed demographic factors and factors in dosing, whether steroids are managed by surgeon alone or in collaboration with colleagues, and the most common taper regimens used. Four hundred fifty surveys were returned. Sixty-four respondents had retired or answered less than 50 per cent; 386 (211CRS, 116GS, 45TS, and 14ES) were available for analysis. The majority managed both perioperative (85.5%) and tapers (77%) themselves; TS and ES were significantly less likely to use other physicians (P < 0.001). The preoperative dose used most frequently was 100 mg hydrocortisone intravenously (76% CRS, 64% GS, 22% TS, and 93% ES). Most CRS (44.5%) and GS (24.1%) taper intravenous steroids over 3 days, whereas TS (33.3%) and ES (50%) return patients to prednisone within 1 to 2 days. Discharge steroid use was inconsistent with CRS (46.4%) tapering prednisone over greater than 21 days, GS (19%) over less than 21 days, and TS (20%) and ES (21.4%) taper over 21 days to preoperative prednisone doses (P < 0.001). In the absence of standard guidelines for perioperative corticosteroid administration, significant variations exist in the regimens used by surgeons in multiple specialties.

How Different Conceptions of Risk Are Used in the Organ Market Debate

The success of kidney and liver transplantation is hindered by a shortage of organs available for transplantation. Although currently illegal in nearly all parts of the world, a living 'donor' or 'vendor' kidney market has been proposed as a means to reduce or even end this shortage. Physician members of the American Society of Transplantation, the American Society of Transplant Surgeons and the American Association for the Study of Liver Disease were surveyed regarding organ markets for both living kidney and living liver transplantation. The survey queried respondents about their attitudes toward directed living donation, nondirected living donation, the potential legalization of living donor organ markets and the reasons for their support or opposition to organ markets. Partial or completed surveys were returned by 346 of 697 eligible respondents (50%). While virtually all supported or strongly supported directed living donation (98% and 95% for kidney and liver lobes, respectively), the vast majority disagreed or strongly disagreed with the legalization of living donor organ markets (80% for kidneys and 90% for liver lobes). Both those who support and those who oppose a legalized living donor organ market rate risk to the donor among the most important factors to justify their position.

The D&amp;T Report

The D&amp;T Report

A critical analysis of liver allograft utilization from the US deceased donor pool

A critical analysis of liver allograft utilization from the US deceased donor pool

The high‐risk recipient: the Eighth Annual American Society of Transplant Surgeons’ State‐of‐the‐Art Winter Symposium

The evolution of organ transplantation has produced results so successful that many transplant programs commonly see recipients with medical risks, which in the past, would have prohibited transplantation. The Eighth Annual American Society of Transplant Surgeons State-of-the-Art Winter Symposium focused on the high-risk recipient. The assessment of risk has evolved over time, as transplantation has matured. The acceptance of risk associated with a given candidate today is often made in consideration of the relative value of the organ to other candidates, the regulatory environment, and philosophical notions of utility, equity, and fairness. In addition, transplant programs must balance outcomes, transplant volume, and the costs of organ transplantation, which are impacted by high-risk recipients. Discussion focused on various types of high-risk recipients, such as those with coronary artery disease, morbid obesity, and hepatitis C; strategies to reduce risk, such as down-staging of hepatocellular carcinoma and treatment of pulmonary hypertension; the development of alternatives to transplantation; and the degree to which risk can or should be used to define candidate selection. These approaches can modify the impact of recipient risk on transplant outcomes and permit transplantation to be applied successfully to a greater variety of patients.

The Declaration of Istanbul: Review and Commentary by the American Society of Transplant Surgeons Ethics Committee and Executive Committee

The American Society of Transplant Surgeons (ASTS) was asked to endorse the 'The Declaration of Istanbul on Organ Trafficking and Transplant Tourism.' The document has been reviewed by the ASTS Ethics Committee and their ensuing report was presented, discussed and approved by the ASTS Council. The ASTS vigorously supports the principles outlined in the Declaration and details specific current obstacles to implementation of some of its proposals in the United States.

The Riskiest Job in Medicine: Transplant Surgeons and Organ Procurement Travel

Transplant surgeons are exposed to workplace risk due to the urgent nature of travel related to organ procurement. A retrospective cohort study was completed using data from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients and the National Transportation Safety Board. A web-based survey was administered to members of the American Society of Transplant Surgeons. The survey response rate was 38% (281/747). Involvement in > or =1 procurement-related travel accident was reported by 15% of respondents; surgeons reported 61 accidents and 11 fatalities. Air travel was used in 26% of procurements and was involved in 56% of accidents. The risk of fatality while traveling on an organ procurement flight was estimated to be 1000 times higher than scheduled commercial flight. Involvement in a 'near miss accident' was reported by 80.8%. Only 16% of respondents reported feeling 'very safe' while traveling. Procurement of organs by the geographically closest transplant center would have reduced the need for air travel (>100 nautical miles) for lung, heart, liver and pancreas procurement by 35%, 43%, 31% and 49%, respectively (p < 0.0001). These reductions were observed in each Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network region. Though these data have important limitations, they suggest that organ procurement travel is associated with significant risk. Improvements in organ procurement travel are needed.

Stimulus for Organ Donation: A Survey of the American Society of Transplant Surgeons Membership

Federal legislation has been proposed to modify the National Organ Transplant Act in a way that would permit government-regulated strategies, including financial incentives, to be implemented and evaluated. The Council and Ethics Committee of the American Society of Transplant Surgeons conducted a brief web-based survey of its members' (n = 449, 41.6% response rate) views on acceptable or unacceptable strategies to increase organ donation. The majority of the membership supports reimbursement for funeral expenses, an income tax credit on the final return of a deceased donor and an income tax credit for registering as an organ donor as strategies for increasing deceased donation. Payment for lost wages, guaranteed health insurance and an income tax credit are strategies most strongly supported by the membership to increase living donation. For both deceased and living donation, the membership is mostly opposed to cash payments to donors, their estates or to next-of-kin. There is strong support for a government-regulated trial to evaluate the potential benefits and harms of financial incentives for both deceased and living donation. Overall, there is strong support within the ASTS membership for changes to NOTA that would permit the implementation and careful evaluation of indirect, government-regulated strategies to increase organ donation.

ASTS Recommended Practice Guidelines for Controlled Donation after Cardiac Death Organ Procurement and Transplantation

The American Society of Transplant Surgeons (ASTS) champions efforts to increase organ donation. Controlled donation after cardiac death (DCD) offers the family and the patient with a hopeless prognosis the option to donate when brain death criteria will not be met. Although DCD is increasing, this endeavor is still in the midst of development. DCD protocols, recovery techniques and organ acceptance criteria vary among organ procurement organizations and transplant centers. Growing enthusiasm for DCD has been tempered by the decreased yield of transplantable organs and less favorable posttransplant outcomes compared with donation after brain death. Logistics and ethics relevant to DCD engender discussion and debate among lay and medical communities. Regulatory oversight of the mandate to increase DCD and a recent lawsuit involving professional behavior during an attempted DCD have fueled scrutiny of this activity. Within this setting, the ASTS Council sought best-practice guidelines for controlled DCD organ donation and transplantation. The proposed guidelines are evidence based when possible. They cover many aspects of DCD kidney, liver and pancreas transplantation, including donor characteristics, consent, withdrawal of ventilatory support, operative technique, ischemia times, machine perfusion, recipient considerations and biliary issues. DCD organ transplantation involves unique challenges that these recommendations seek to address.

Moving Kidney Allocation Forward: The ASTS Perspective

In 2008, the United Network for Organ Sharing issued a request for information regarding a proposed revision to kidney allocation policy. This plan described combining dialysis time, donor characteristics and the estimated life years from transplant (LYFT) each candidate would gain in an allocation score that would rank waiting candidates. Though there were some advantages of this plan, the inclusion of LYFT raised many questions. Foremost, there was no clear agreement that LYFT should be the main criterion by which patients should be ranked. Moreover, to rank waiting candidates with this metric, long-term survival models were required in which there was no incorporation of patient preference or discounting for long survival times and for which the predictive accuracy did not achieve accepted standards. The American Society of Transplant Surgeons was pleased to participate in the evaluation of the proposal. Ultimately, the membership did not favor this proposal, because we felt that it was too complicated and that the projected slight increase in overall utility was not justified by the compromise in individual justice that was required. We offer alternative policy options to address some of the unmet needs and issues that were brought to light during this interesting process.

Optimizing the Surgical Residents' Educational Experience on Transplant Surgery

Surgical specialties with high service demands like transplant surgery are challenged to provide good educational value for rotating surgical residents while maintaining quality patient care. Based on poor resident evaluations, the Resident Review Committee for Surgery (RRC-S) has proposed removing the requirement for transplant surgery rotations from general surgery residency programs. The objectives of this article are to provide a situation analysis pertaining to the problem of poor resident evaluations from the perspective of the American Society of Transplant Surgeons (ASTS), and to propose an action plan to improve the current situation. The Fellowship Training and Curriculum committees of the ASTS together with ASTS leadership and ASTS fellowship program directors collaborated to address these concerns by identifying key contributory factors and by initiating an action plan to correct them. The following 4 major issues pertaining to transplant surgery rotations were considered most relevant to the problem: (1) high service demands, (2) inadequate prioritization of resident education, (3) competition with fellows for educational opportunities, and (4) the need by many programs to send their residents to other centers to obtain transplant experience. Based on these issues, the ASTS leadership issued directives to all programs with rotating residents to (1) designate a transplant surgeon to resident education experience on transplant; (2) create a service infrastructure that is not dependent on surgical residents; (3) re-educate faculty, fellows, support staff and residents regarding resident expectations on transplant surgery; (4) create a structured and sustainable educational experience; (5) increase resident involvement in surgical procedures; and (6) obtain ongoing feedback from rotating residents and the program directors. Transplant surgery can be a valuable educational experience for surgical residents. The ASTS is dedicated to collaborating with general surgery residents and program directors in ongoing efforts to enhance this experience.

Accountability in Health Care–Transplant Community Offers Leadership

Two concerns expressed by the American Society of Transplant Surgeons (ASTS) are that (1) the new Medicare regulations for transplant hospitals take a 'punitive' approach and that (2) the outcome requirement may thwart innovation by not including certain risk factors into the risk adjustment used to calculate expected outcomes. This article explains efforts by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) to encourage quality improvement. CMS limits outcomes-related enforcement to situations where failure rates exceed certain substantial 'tolerance limits', ensuring opportunity for quality improvement to be effective prior to enforcement. Transplantations involving a disproportionate share of risk factors not incorporated into the risk-adjustment methodology can also be raised through CMS''mitigating factors' process. Of the 22 mitigating factor requests completed through March 10, 2009, 7 raised issues of risk adjustment (none involved experimental protocols). Four of the seven requests were approved for other reasons (evidence of effective program changes and improved outcomes). CMS concluded that none of the seven made a persuasive case based on risk factors. The early data indicate that program deficiencies may outweigh risk adjustment issues. CMS agrees to consider the ASTS suggestions for future action and continues to monitor the situation in case a different pattern emerges.

Improving Organ Transplantation in the United States—A Regulatory Perspective

Improving Organ Transplantation in the United States—A Regulatory Perspective

Transplant Center Regulations—A Mixed Blessing? An ASTS Council Viewpoint

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) has developed a set of regulations that spell out the Conditions of Participation (CoPs) for provider hospitals that wish to be certified (and thus eligible for reimbursement) by Medicare for transplant services. The American Society of Transplant Surgeons (ASTS) Council has played a major role in providing CMS with advice and guidance in the development and ongoing implementation of these conditions through a process of fruitful dialogue. In this report, we highlight the events that led to the development of the regulations and describe the process to date in implementing the CoPs. We have raised some important questions regarding the effectiveness of the regulations for improving safety, and we have highlighted the cost associated with their implementation. This report has been vetted by and represents the opinions of the Council of the ASTS.

Proceedings of Consensus Conference on Simultaneous Liver Kidney Transplantation (SLK)

A consensus conference sponsored by the American Society of Transplant Surgeons (ASTS), American Society of Transplantation (AST), United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) and American Society of Nephrology (ASN) convened to examine simultaneous liver-kidney transplantation (SLK). Directors from the 25 largest liver transplant programs along with speakers with recognized expertise attended. The purposes of this conference were to propose indications for SLK, to establish a prospective data registry and, most importantly, to recommend standard listing criteria for these patients. Scientific registry of transplant recipients data, and single center data regarding chronic kidney disease (CKD) and acute kidney injury (AKI) in conjunction with liver failure as a basis for SLK was presented and discussed. The consensus was that Regional Review Boards (RRB) should determine listing for SLK, as with other MELD exceptions, with automatic approval for: (i) End-stage renal disease with cirrhosis and symptomatic portal hypertension or hepatic vein wedge pressure gradient >/= 10 mm Hg (ii) Liver failure and CKD with GFR </= 30 mL/min (iii) AKI or hepatorenal syndrome with creatinine >/= 2.0 mg/dL and dialysis >/= 8 weeks (iv) Liver failure and CKD and biopsy demonstrating > 30% glomerulosclerosis or 30% fibrosis. The RRB would evaluate all other requests to determine appropriateness.

Steven C. Stain, MD

Abstracts The Dr. Neil Lempert Professorship in Surgery serves as a tribute to the professional legacy of Neil Lempert, MD, who in 1969 became the capital region’s first transplant surgeon and led the team that performed the first kidney transplant in northeastern New York at Albany Medical Center. Lem-pert served as director of transplantation until 1992 and, in 1997, the Lempert professorship was established to honor his legacy as an exceptional medical leader. In his retirement, he continues to work closely with Albany Medical Center. At the time of his retirement as director of the transplant program at Albany Medical Center in 1992, the Organ Procurement Organization of Albany Medical College wrote: Neil Lempert, MD, has been part of one of the most exciting chapters in medicine at Albany Medical Center—organ transplantation. Dr. Lempert initiated the organ transplant program at the Medical Center in 1967, and performed the first transplant two years later. Under his leadership, the program has thrived. Since then, nearly 1,000 kidneys have been transplanted at Albany Medical Center . “Work with transplant patients provides gratification and satisfaction,” said Lempert. “We see patients whose existence surrounds their dialysis treatment. We have patients who frequently are so sick they are hardly able to walk. After surgery, they can resume normal life.” During the early years of the program, Lempert had to be on call 24 hours a day, ready to perform surgery whenever a kidney became available. “We still have a lack of suitable organs,” he said. “We need better use of available organs, better prevention and treatment of rejection.” Lempert received his MD at Albany Medical College and served as research fellow in surgery at Mary Imogene Bassett Hospital in Cooperstown from 1963–1964. There, his mentor was David Blumenstock, MD, chief of surgery, who was pioneering a program in transplantation. After a tour of duty in the army, Lempert returned to Albany Medical Center in 1967. He has been active in professional organizations, serving on the board of directors of the Kidney Foundation of Northeastern New York, the American College of Surgeons, the American Society of Transplant Surgeons, the United Network for Organ Sharing and the State of New York Commission on Quality of Care of the Mentally Disabled.

Solving the Organ Shortage Crisis: The 7th Annual American Society of Transplant Surgeons’ State-of-the-Art Winter Symposium

The 2007 American Society of Transplant Surgeons' (ASTS) State-of-the-Art Winter Symposium entitled, 'Solving the Organ Shortage Crisis' explored ways to increase the supply of donor organs to meet the challenge of increasing waiting lists and deaths while awaiting transplantation. While the increasing use of organs previously considered marginal, such as those from expanded criteria donors (ECD) or donors after cardiac death (DCD) has increased the number of transplants from deceased donors, these transplants are often associated with inferior outcomes and higher costs. The need remains for innovative ways to increase both deceased and living donor transplants. In addition to increasing ECD and DCD utilization, increasing use of deceased donors with certain types of infections such as Hepatitis B and C, and increasing use of living donor liver, lung and intestinal transplants may also augment the organ supply. The extent by which donors may be offered incentives for donation, and the practical, ethical and legal implications of compensating organ donors were also debated. The expanded use of nonstandard organs raises potential ethical considerations about appropriate recipient selection, informed consent and concerns that the current regulatory environment discourages and penalizes these efforts.

Laparoscopic Living Donor Nephrectomy: A Look at Current Trends and Practice Patterns at Major Transplant Centers Across the United States

Laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy is now the preferred technique for living donor renal transplantation. To our knowledge we provide the first published multi-institutional consensus describing practice patterns, technical considerations and interesting controversies involved in laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy. We designed a survey with 33 multiple choice questions looking at demographics, patient selection, technical considerations, postoperative care and followup involved in laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy. Surveys were sent to the 58 fellowship training programs in the United States accredited by the American Society of Transplant Surgeons. The 32 responding programs performed approximately 40% of laparoscopic living donor nephrectomies in the United States in 2005. We found that almost all centers used a donor committee to screen candidates, enforce a body mass index cutoff, and use right kidneys when necessary and left kidneys in women of childbearing age. Regarding laparoscopic access, pure laparoscopy was favored 2 to 1 over the hand assisted technique and most of those who use nonbladed trocars do not close the fascia. Most surgeons divide the adrenal vein in left cases, use a vascular stapler on the renal artery and vein, and keep the ureter with the gonadal vein in the specimen. At most centers heparin is given before controlling the vessels. Extraction in pure laparoscopic cases is usually performed using a preplaced entrapment bag through a modified Pfannenstiel incision. Our survey describes how most renal transplant centers with accredited fellowship programs in the United States approach laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy. Specifically trends are revealed regarding patient selection, laparoscopic access and surgical technique.

World Transplant Congress

The World Transplant Congress (WTC) is the first joint international transplant meeting co-organised by the Transplantation Society, the American Society of Transplantation (AST) and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons (ASTS). It was the first meeting of this calibre that was being held by three world-renowned authorities in the field of transplantation. Under the direction of the congress president, AB Cosimi, the attendance of this meeting is a ‘must’ for all working in the field of transplantation. The congress had provided an important forum for the exchange of new scientific and clinical information that is relevant to solid organ and tissue transplantation. In addition, it also created an arena for the interchange of ideas regarding the care and management of transplant recipients. There were many sessions that were engineered in order to facilitate the discussion of socioeconomic, ethical and regulatory issues related transplantation. On the whole, the meeting has set a very high standard for any future transplant congresses to match – providing the delegates with updates on transplantation with the new scientific prospectives in T cell costimulation, innate immunity (dendritic cells), anatomy of immune response and regulatory T cell biology. More importantly, it has highlighted the potentials of harnessing these new findings for future biological therapies in preventing rejection and inducing tolerance.