Donation After Brain Death Research Articles

Application of extended criteria donor grafts in liver transplantation for acute-on-chronic liver failure: A retrospective cohort study.

There is no consensus on the usage of extended criteria donor (ECD) grafts in liver transplantation (LT) for acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) patients. To summarize the experience of using ECD livers in ACLF-LT. A retrospective cohort study was conducted, enrolling patients who underwent LT at the First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University from January 2015 to November 2021. The patients were divided into ECD and non-ECD groups for analysis. A total of 145 recipients were enrolled in this study, of which ECD and non-ECD recipients accounted for 53.8% and 46.2%, respectively. Donation after cardiac death (DCD) recipients accounted for the minority compared with donation after brain death (DBD) recipients (16.6% vs 83.4%). Neither overall survival nor graft survival significantly differed between ECD and non-ECD and DCD and DBD recipients. ECD grafts were associated with a significantly higher incidence of early allograft dysfunction (EAD) than non-ECD grafts (67.9% vs 41.8%, P = 0.002). Postoperative outcomes between DCD and DBD recipients were comparable (P > 0.05). ECD graft (P = 0.009), anhepatic phase (P = 0.034) and recipient gamma glutamyltransferase (P = 0.016) were independent risk factors for EAD. Recipient preoperative number of extrahepatic organ failures > 2 (P = 0.015) and intraoperative blood loss (P = 0.000) were independent predictors of poor post-LT survival. Although related to a higher risk of EAD, ECD grafts can be safely used in ACLF-LT. The main factors affecting post-LT survival in ACLF patients are their own severe preoperative disease and intraoperative blood loss.

Graft survival and delayed graft function with normothermic regional perfusion and rapid recovery after circulatory death in kidney transplantation: a propensity score matching study.

A shortage of kidney grafts has led to the implementation of various strategies, including donations after circulatory death. The in situ normothermic regional perfusion technique has been introduced to improve graft quality by reducing warm ischemia times. However, there is limited evidence available on its mid- and long-term outcomes. Therefore, this study aimed to compare the incidence of delayed graft function, graft function, and survival at three years among three groups: brain death donors, rapid recovery, and normothermic regional perfusion. A retrospective analysis of a cohort of kidney transplantations was conducted at a single referral center between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2019. Univariate and multivariate regression models and propensity score matching analysis were performed to compare recipient-related, transplantation procedure-related, donor-related, and kidney function variables. A total of 327 patients were included, with 256 kidneys from brain death donors, 52 kidneys from rapid recovery, and 19 patients from normothermic regional perfusion. After propensity score matching, univariate and multivariate analyses showed a higher incidence of delayed graft function in the rapid recovery group compared to the others (OR: 2.39 CI95%: 1.19, 4.77) with a longer hospital stay (median 11, 15 and 10 days, respectively). However, no differences in 1- and 3-year graft function and survival were found. Normothermic regional perfusion offers advantages over rapid recovery, with a reduced incidence of delayed graft function and a shorter hospital stay. However, no differences in mid-term graft function and survival were found.

Results of Kidney Transplantation with Controlled Cardiac Death Donors Older Than 70 Years

The persistent shortage of optimal kidney donors and the progressive increase in patients on the waiting list has led to an expansion of organ acceptance criteria, such as controlled donation after circulatory death (cDCD) donors, as well as an expansion of criteria for accepting these organs (age, comorbidities, etc). However, there are some concerns and doubts about the survival outcomes achieved with these allografts. A retrospective observational single-center study including all kidney transplants (KTs) from donors ≥70 years old using cDCD and donation after brain death (DBD) performed from January 2017 to December 2022. A comparative analysis was conducted between the 2 groups regarding clinical characteristics, medium and short-term clinical outcomes, and patient and graft survival rates. We studied 123 KTs performed with donors ≥70 years old, 81 from DBD, and 42 from cDCD. The median follow-up was 41 months (18-60). The age of the recipients from cDCD was higher (68 vs 65 years; P=.03), without significant differences in associated comorbidities. The age of DBD was significantly higher (73 vs 71; P=.001), and cDCD donors had a higher prevalence of diabetes (16% vs 5%; P=.04); however, there were no significant differences in Kidney Donor Profile Index between the groups. There was a trend toward a higher percentage of Delayed Graft Function in the cDCD group, although renal function was similar between the groups during follow-up. There were also no differences between the percentages of acute rejection. The mean graft survival rate censored for death with a functioning graft at one year (81% for DBD vs 79% for cDCD) and at 3 years (83% for DBD vs 75% for cDCD) was satisfactory (P=.141). The medium-term results of KT with cDCD donors are promising and comparable to those of DBD, allowing for an expansion of the donor pool for selected transplant recipients.

Using extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in donations after cardiac death or brain death: A single-center experience and long-term outcome.

The use of extended criteria donors is a routine practice that sometimes involves extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) in donations after cardiac death or brain death. We performed a retrospective study in a single center from January 2006 to December 2019. The study included 90 deceased donor liver transplants. The patients were divided into three groups: the donation after brain death (DBD) group (n = 58, 64.4%), the DBD with ECMO group (n = 11, 12.2%) and the donation after cardiac death (DCD) with ECMO group (n = 21, 23.3%). There were no significant differences between the DBD with ECMO group and the DBD group. When comparing the DCD with ECMO group and the DBD group, there were statistically significant differences for total warm ischemia time (p < 0.001), total cold ischemia time (p = 0.023), and split liver transplantation (p < 0.001), and there was significantly poor recovery in regard to total bilirubin level (p = 0.027) for the DCD with ECMO group by repeated measures ANOVA. The 5-year survival rates of the DBD, DBD with ECMO, and DCD with ECMO groups were 78.1%, 90.9%, and 75.6%, respectively. The survival rate was not significantly different when comparing the DBD group to either the DBD with ECMO group (p = 0.435) or the DCD with ECMO group (p = 0.310). Using ECMO in donations after cardiac death or brain death is a good technology, and it contributed to 35.6% of the liver graft pool.

Histological and clinical evaluation of discarded kidneys in a European cohort of deceased brain death donor kidneys of marginal quality.

Despite organ shortages, the discard rate of deceased donor kidneys is high. Risk factors for this trend warrant further study. We investigated reasons for discard in a cohort of brain death donors with marginal kidneys and procurement biopsies. Paraffin embedded procurement biopsies were systematically reevaluated and graded for the purpose of the study. Assessment included percentage of global glomerulosclerosis, Banff Lesion scores and tubular epithelial damage. Donor-, transplant process-, perfusion quality-, histopathology-, and recipient-related parameters were compared between discarded and transplanted organs. Although most clinical characteristics were similar between donors whose kidneys were transplanted and those whose kidneys were procured but discarded, discarded kidneys were more likely to be from donors with hepatitis C, to have undergone wedge biopsies, to show changes of acute and chronic injury and to be deemed poor quality. Except for obvious anatomic abnormalities, kidneys were often discarded due to the findings of procurement biopsies. Donors of kidneys discarded for histologic reasons more often had hypertension, coronary artery disease, stroke, and increased serum creatinine. The reason for discard was unknown in 20% of cases. Discarded kidneys came from donors who appeared to be clinically similar to donors whose kidneys were utilized for transplant. A considerable proportion of discarded kidneys were of acceptable quality. The analysis of theoutcome of every recovered organ could help to overcome this problem. Procurement biopsies more often lead to discard than to transplantation of recovered organs. Proper handling during allocation has to be determined.

Donation after circulatory death significantly reduces waitlist times while not changing post–heart transplant outcomes: A United Network for Organ Sharing Analysis

ObjectiveRecently, several centers in the US have begun performing donation after circulatory death (DCD) heart transplants (HT) in adults. We sought to characterize the recent use of DCD HT, waitlist-time, and outcomes compared to donation after brain death (DBD). MethodsUsing the UNOS database, 10,402 adult (>18yo) HT recipients from January 2019-June 2022 were identified: 425(4%) were DCD and 9,977(96%) were DBD recipients. Post-transplant outcomes in matched and unmatched cohorts, and waitlist-times were compared between groups. ResultsDCD and DBD recipients had similar age [57y for both, p=0.791]. DCD recipients were more likely white (67% vs. 60%,p=0.002), on LVAD (40% vs. 32%,p<0.001) & listed as status 4-6 (60% vs. 24%,p<0.001); however, less likely to require inotropes (22% vs. 40%,p<0.001), & preoperative ECMO (0.9% vs. 6%,p<0.001). DCD donors were younger (29 vs. 32y,p<0.001), had less renal dysfunction (15% vs. 39%,p<0.001), diabetes (1.9% vs. 3.8%,p=0.050) or hypertension (9.9% vs. 16%,p=0.001). In matched & unmatched cohorts, early survival was similar (p=0.22). Adjusted waitlist-time was shorter in DCD group (21d vs. 31d,p<0.001) compared to DBD cohort and 5-fold shorter (DCD-22d vs DBD-115d,p<0.001) for candidates in status 4-6 which was 60% of DCD cohort. ConclusionsThe community is using DCD mostly for those recipients who are expected to have extended wait list times (e.g., Durable LVADs, Status >4). DCD recipients had similar post-transplant early survival, and shorter adjusted waitlist-time compared to DBD group. Given this early success, efforts should be made to expand the donor pool using DCD, especially for traditionally disadvantaged recipients on the waitlist.

The Jordanian Kidney Transplant Experience: A Glorious Past and a Challenging Present

Jordan was one of the first Arab countries to enact legislation governing organ donation and transplantation. Jordan has seen an increase in the frequency of kidney transplants performed utilizing organs from living donors since that time. Jordan has been a reputable regional center for kidney transplantation and has a long history of excellence in the field.&#x0D; Jordan's low rate of kidney transplants from deceased donors, Despite the legality of the Jordanian constitution, the availability of highly skilled nephrologists and transplant surgeons as well as advanced health care is quite alarming and could be caused by a number of different factors. The absence of a formal government plan to control brain death donation is the most important factor.&#x0D; The goals of this study are to provide a description of the current state of kidney transplantation in Jordan, a summary of the most significant barriers to expanding kidney transplantation efforts that focus on kidneys donated by deceased donors, and suggestions for increasing the number of kidney transplants from brain dead donors.

Preliminary Study of Kidney Transplantation from 2007-2019 in Isfahan, Iran

Background: The optimal treatment for the End- Stage Renal Disease(ESRD) is called kidney transplantation, which can typically improve quality of life and patient survival. Aims: The aim of this investigation was to evaluate clinical and demographic data of kidney transplantation in a main tertiary hospital in Isfahan/Iran. Objectives: The published articles confirmed that a successful kidney transplant reduces mortality. Consequently, for further challenges associated with the causes and outcomes, preliminary studies are crucial in a large population of kidney transplant. Methods: From the database of hospital and transplant surgery notebook, the features such as, age, duration of surgery, the number of kidney donors (living person or brain death), and predisposing factors for ESRD were extracted and analyzed. Results: A total of 688 kidney transplant recipients comprised of males (n= 473M) and females (n= 215) were considered for further analysis. Recipients received kidneys from 482 living and 206 cadaver donors. The mean age of donors versus recipients was 30.4 versus 43.7 years (p≤0.05) respectively. Operation time in the recipients of living versus cadaver donors was 3.7 versus 4 hours. Operation time from 5.5 (the year 2007) reached 3.7 hours (the year 2019). The number of cadaver donors was 3 (the year 2009) which reached at 19 (the year 2019). Conclusion: In Isfahan, Iran, more than 50% of the population studied needed kidney transplantation around the age of 45 years, and the number of transplanted men was 2.2 times higher than the females. The mean duration of the operation was significantly reduced, and the number of brain death donors steadily increased. Further, remodelling and analyzing the data obtained from this initial investigation could facilitate resourceful decisions regarding practical aspects of kidney transplantation outcome.

Lung transplantation in primary pulmonary arterial hypertension and pulmonary venous hypertension.

End-stage lung disease from primary pulmonary hypertension (PPHTN) and pulmonary venous-occlusive disease (PVOD) may require lung transplantation (LT). While medical therapies exist for the palliation of PPHTN, no therapies exist for PVOD. The study's objective is to compare outcomes of LT in these patients. Patients with PPHTN and PVOD who had undergone LT were identified in the UNOS database (2005-2022). Univariable analyses compared differences between groups in demographic, clinical, and post-transplant outcomes. Multivariable logistic regression examined the association between the diagnosis group and survival. Overall survival time between groups was compared using the Kaplan-Meier method. Six hundred and ninety-six PPHTN and 78 PVOD patients underwent LT during the study period. Patients with PVOD had lower pulmonary artery mean pressure (47vs. 53mmHg, p<.001), but higher cardiac output (4.51vs. 4.31 L/min, p=.04). PVOD patients were more likely to receive lungs from donation after cardiac death donors (7.7vs. 2.9%, p=.04). There were no differences in postoperative complications or length of stay. PVOD was associated with superior survival at 30-day (100vs. 93%, p=.02) and 90-day post-transplant (93vs. 83%, p=.03), but not at later time points. In multivariable analyses, PVOD and brain death donor use were associated with better survival up to 90-day mark. Patients undergoing LT for PVOD had better initial survival, which disappeared after 1 year of transplantation. Donation after circulatory death donor use had a short-term survival disadvantage.

Outcomes of Heart Transplant Donation After Circulatory Death

BackgroundHeart transplantation using donation after circulatory death (DCD) allografts is increasingly common, expanding the donor pool and reducing transplant wait times. However, data remain limited on clinical outcomes. ObjectivesWe sought to compare 6-month and 1-year clinical outcomes between recipients of DCD hearts, most of them recovered with the use of normothermic regional perfusion (NRP), and recipients of donation after brain death (DBD) hearts. MethodsWe conducted a single-center retrospective observational study of all adult heart-only transplants from January 2020 to January 2023. Recipient and donor data were abstracted from medical records and the United Network for Organ Sharing registry, respectively. Survival analysis and Cox regression were used to compare the groups. ResultsDuring the study period, 385 adults (median age 57.4 years [IQR: 48.0-63.7 years]) underwent heart-only transplantation, including 122 (32%) from DCD donors, 83% of which were recovered with the use of NRP. DCD donors were younger and had fewer comorbidities than DBD donors. DCD recipients were less often hospitalized before transplantation and less likely to require pretransplantation temporary mechanical circulatory support compared with DBD recipients. There were no significant differences between groups in 1-year survival, incidence of severe primary graft dysfunction, treated rejection during the first year, or likelihood of cardiac allograft vasculopathy at 1 year after transplantation. ConclusionsIn the largest single-center comparison of DCD and DBD heart transplantations to date, outcomes among DCD recipients are noninferior to those of DBD recipients. This study adds to the published data supporting DCD donors as a safe means to expand the heart donor pool.

The Frequency of Organ Donation and the Clinical Characteristics of Donors with Brain Death before and after the Outbreak of the COVID-19 Pandemic in Rasht, Iran

Background The COVID-19 pandemic caused changes in daily life and disrupted hospital performance and the provision of medical services, especially in the organ transplant departments. Objective This study aims to compare the frequency of organ donation and transplantation before and after the COVID-19 outbreak in the transplant centers of northern Iran. Methods This cross-sectional study was conducted on 75 donors with brain death from 2018 to 2021 in Rasht. Demographic data, underlying diseases, history of smoking and drug use, causes of brain death, type of donated organ, number of donated organs per patient, type of transplanted organ, and the location of transplantation (in or out of the province) were recorded. Then, these factors were compared between two time periods: Before the pandemic (from July 2018 to February 2020) and during the pandemic (from February 2020 to August 2021). The recorded data was analyzed in SPSS software, version 21. The significance level was set at 0.05. Results The mean age of donors during the pandemic was significantly higher than that of patients before the pandemic (P&lt;0.001). The most common cause of brain death in donors before the pandemic was trauma; after the pandemic, cerebrovascular causes were more common (P=0.01). The frequency of organ donation and the mean number of donated organs per donor during the pandemic were significantly lower than before the pandemic (P&lt;0.001). Conclusion The COVID-19 pandemic has significant impact on the process of organ donation and transplantation in northern Iran.

Algorithmic Approach for Brain Death Diagnosis and Donor Care

Algorithmic Approach for Brain Death Diagnosis and Donor Care

Improved Early Post-Transplant Outcomes and Organ Use in Kidney Transplant Using Normothermic Regional Perfusion for Donation after Circulatory Death: National Experience in the US.

Normothermic regional perfusion (NRP) is a technique that is intended to enhance organ transplant outcomes from donation circulatory death (DCD) donors. A retrospective analysis of data from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients was performed. DCD donors were screened for inclusion based on date of donation 2020 or later, and whether the heart was also recovered for transplantation. We grouped donors as either donation after brain death or DCD. DCD donors were further divided into groups including those in which the heart was not recovered for transplant (Non-Heart DCD) and those in which it was, based on recovery technique (thoracoabdominal-NRP [TA-NRP] Heart DCD and Super Rapid Recovery Heart DCD). A total of 219 kidney transplant recipients receiving organs from TA-NRP Heart DCD donors were compared to 436 SRR Super Rapid Recovery DCD, 10,630 Super Rapid Recovery non-heart DCD, and 27,820 donations after brain death recipients. Kidney transplant recipients of TA-NRP DCD allografts experienced shorter length of stay, lower rates of delayed graft function, and lower serum creatinine at the time of discharge when compared with recipients of other DCD allografts. Our analysis demonstrates superior early kidney allograft function when TA-NRP is used for DCD organ recovery.

Myocardial edema, inflammation, and injury in human heart donated after circulatory death are sensitive to warm ischemia and subsequent cold storage

BackgroundSingle-dose del Nido solution was recently used in human donation after circulatory death (DCD) heart procurement. We compared the effect of del Nido cardioplegia on myocardial edema, inflammatory response, and injury in human DCD hearts and human donation after brain death (DBD) hearts with different warm ischemic times (WIT) and subsequent cold saline storage times (CST). MethodsA total of 24 human hearts, including 6 in the DBD group and 18 in the DCD group—were procured for the research study. The DCD group was divided into 3 subgroups based on WIT: 20, 40, and ≥60 minutes. All hearts received 1 L of del Nido cardioplegia before being placed in cold saline for 6 hours. Left ventricular biopsies were performed at 0, 2, 4, and 6 hours. Temporal changes in myocardial edema, inflammatory cytokines (TNF-α, IL-6, and IL-1β), and histopathology injury scores were compared between the DBD and DCD groups. ResultsDCD hearts showed more profound changes in myocardial edema, inflammation, and injury than DBD hearts at baseline and subsequent CST. The DCD heart with WIT of 20 and 40 minutes with CST of 4 and 2 hours, respectively, appeared to have limited myocardial edema, inflammation, and injury. DCD hearts with WIT ≥60 minutes showed severe myocardial edema, inflammation, and injury at baseline and subsequent CST. ConclusionsSingle-dose cold del Nido cardioplegia and subsequent cold normal saline storage can preserve both DCD and DBD hearts. DCD hearts have been shown to be able to tolerate a WIT of 20 minutes and subsequent CST of 4 hours without experiencing significant myocardial edema, inflammation, and injury.

Development of a liver graft assessment expert machine-learning system: when the artificial intelligence helps liver transplant surgeons.

The complex process of liver graft assessment is one point for improvement in liver transplantation. The main objective of this study is to develop a tool that supports the surgeon who is responsible for liver donation in the decision-making process whether to accept a graft or not using the initial variables available to it. Liver graft samples candidate for liver transplantation after donor brain death were studied. All of them were evaluated "in situ" for transplantation, and those discarded after the "in situ" evaluation were considered as no transplantable liver grafts, while those grafts transplanted after "in situ" evaluation were considered as transplantable liver grafts. First, a single-center, retrospective and cohort study identifying the risk factors associated with the no transplantable group was performed. Then, a prediction model decision support system based on machine learning, and using a tree ensemble boosting classifier that is capable of helping to decide whether to accept or decline a donor liver graft, was developed. A total of 350 liver grafts that were evaluated for liver transplantation were studied. Steatosis was the most frequent reason for classifying grafts as no transplantable, and the main risk factors identified in the univariant study were age, dyslipidemia, personal medical history, personal surgical history, bilirubinemia, and the result of previous liver ultrasound (p < 0.05). When studying the developed model, we observe that the best performance reordering in terms of accuracy corresponds to 76.29% with an area under the curve of 0.79. Furthermore, the model provides a classification together with a confidence index of reliability, for most cases in our data, with the probability of success in the prediction being above 0.85. The tool presented in this study obtains a high accuracy in predicting whether a liver graft will be transplanted or deemed non-transplantable based on the initial variables assigned to it. The inherent capacity for improvement in the system causes the rate of correct predictions to increase as new data are entered. Therefore, we believe it is a tool that can help optimize the graft pool for liver transplantation.

Acute rejection in donation after circulatory death (DCD) heart transplants

Donation after circulatory death (DCD) heart transplantation has promising early survival, but the effects on rejection remain unclear. The United Network for Organ Sharing database was queried for adult heart transplants from December 1, 2019, to December 31, 2021. Multiorgan transplants and loss to follow-up were excluded. The primary outcome was acute rejection, comparing DCD and donation after brain death (DBD) transplants. A total of 292 DCD and 5,582 DBD transplants met study criteria. Most DCD transplants were transplanted at status 3-4 (61.0%) compared to 58.6% of DBD recipients at status 1-2. DCD recipients were less likely to be hospitalized at transplant (26.7% vs 58.3%, p<0.001) and to require intra-aortic balloon pumping (IABP; 9.6% vs 28.9%, p<0.001), extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO; 0.3% vs 5.9%, p<0.001) or temporary left ventricular assist device (LVAD; 1.0% vs 2.7%, p<0.001). DCD recipients were more likely to have acute rejection prior to discharge (23.3% vs 18.4%, p=0.044) and to be hospitalized for rejection (23.4% vs 11.4%, p=0.003) at a median follow-up of 15months; the latter remained significant after propensity matching. On multivariable logistic regression, DCD donation was an independent predictor of acute rejection (odds ratio [OR] 1.47, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.00-2.15, p=0.048) and hospitalization for rejection (OR 2.03, 95% CI 1.06-3.70, p=0.026). On center-specific subgroup analysis, DCD recipients continued to have higher rates of hospitalization for rejection (23.4% vs 13.8%, p=0.043). DCD recipients are more likely to experience acute rejection. Early survival is similar between DCD and DBD recipients, but long-term implications of increased early rejection in DCD recipients require further investigation.

Transplant Outcomes After Exposure of Deceased Kidney Donors to Contrast Medium.

The administration of contrast medium is associated with acute kidney injury; however, the effect of exposure of a deceased organ donor to contrast medium on kidney transplant outcomes has been poorly studied. A retrospective analysis of all deceased kidney donors between 2011 and 2021 and their corresponding recipients in the Netherlands was conducted. Multivariable analyses were performed to assess the associations between contrast medium exposure and delayed graft function (DGF)/graft survival. Linear mixed models were used to assess the differences in mean estimated glomerular filtration rate values in recipients 1 to 6 y after transplantation. In total, 2177 donors and 3638 corresponding kidney graft recipients were included. Twenty-four percent of the donors (n = 520) were exposed to contrast medium, corresponding to 23% of recipients (n = 832). DGF was observed in 36% (n = 1321) and primary nonfunction in 3% (n = 122) of recipients. DGF rates for donation after brain death (DBD) and donation after circulatory death (DCD) donors showed no significant effect of contrast medium exposure (P = 0.15 and P = 0.60 for DBD and DCD donors, respectively). In multivariable analyses, contrast medium administration was not significantly associated with a higher DGF risk (odds ratio 1.06; 95% confidence interval, 0.86-1.36; P = 0.63) nor was a significant predictor for death-censored graft failure (hazard ratio 1.01; 95% confidence interval, 0.77-1.33; P = 0.93). Linear mixed models showed no difference in mean estimated glomerular filtration rate values in recipients 1 to 6 y posttransplantation (P = 0.78). This study indicates that contrast medium administration in DBD and DCD donors has no negative effect on early and long-term kidney graft function.

Early national trends of lung allograft use during donation after circulatory death heart procurement in the United States

ObjectiveInnovative technology such as normothermic regional perfusion and the Organ Care System has expanded donation after circulatory death heart transplantation. We wanted to investigate the impact of donation after circulatory death heart procurement in concurrent lung donation and implantation at a national level. MethodsWe reviewed the United Network for Organ Sharing database for heart donation between December 2019 and March 2022. Donation after circulatory death donors were separated from donation after brain death donors and further categorized based on concomitant organ procurement of lung and heart, or heart only. ResultsA total of 8802 heart procurements consisted of 332 donation after circulatory death donors and 8470 donation after brain death donors. Concomitant lung procurement was lower among donation after circulatory death donors (19.3%) than in donation after brain death donors (38.0%, P < .001). The transplant rate of lungs in the setting of concomitant procurement is 13.6% in donation after circulatory death, whereas it is 38% in donation after brain death (P < .001). Of the 121 lungs from 64 donation after circulatory death donors, 22 lungs were retrieved but discarded (32.2%). Normothermic regional perfusion was performed in 37.3% of donation after circulatory death donors, and there was no difference in lung use between normothermic regional perfusion versus direct procurement and perfusion (20.2% and 18.8%). There was also no difference in 1-year survival between normothermic regional perfusion and direct procurement and perfusion. ConclusionsAlthough national use of donation after circulatory death hearts has increased, donation after circulatory death lungs has remained at a steady state. The implantation of lungs after concurrent procurement with the heart remains low, whereas transplantation of donation after circulatory death hearts is greater than 90%. The use of normothermic regional perfusion lungs has been controversial, and we report comparable 1-year outcomes to standard donation after circulatory death lungs. Further studies are warranted to investigate the underlying mechanisms of normothermic regional perfusion on lung function.

DCD liver transplant in patients with a MELD over 35.

Donation after circulatory death (DCD) liver transplantation (LT) makes up well less than 1% of all LTs with a Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD)≥35 in the United States. We hypothesized DCD-LT yields acceptable ischemia-reperfusion and reasonable outcomes for recipients with MELD≥35. We analyzed recipients with lab-MELD≥35 at transplant within the UCSF (n=41) and the UNOS (n=375) cohorts using multivariate Cox regression and propensity score matching. In the UCSF cohort, five-year patient survival was 85% for DCD-LTs and 86% for matched-Donation after Brain Death donors-(DBD) LTs (p=0.843). Multivariate analyses showed that younger donor/recipient age and more recent transplants (2011-2021 versus 1999-2010) were associated with better survival. DCD vs. DBD graft use did not significantly impact survival (HR: 1.2, 95%CI 0.6-2.7). The transaminase peak was approximately doubled, indicating suggesting an increased ischemia-reperfusion hit. DCD-LTs had a median post-LT length of stay of 11 days, and 34% (14/41) were on dialysis at discharge versus 12 days and 22% (9/41) for DBD-LTs. 27% (11/41) DCD-LTs versus 12% (5/41) DBD-LTs developed a biliary complication (p=0.095). UNOS cohort analysis confirmed patient survival predictors, but DCD graft emerged as a risk factor (HR: 1.5, 95%CI 1.3-1.9) with five-year patient survival of 65% versus 75% for DBD-LTs (p=0.016). This difference became non-significant in a sub-analysis focusing on MELD 35-36 recipients. Analysis of MELD≥35 DCD recipients showed that donor age of <30yo independently reduced the risk of graft loss by 30% (HR, 95%CI: 0.7 (0.9-0.5), p=0.019). Retransplant status was associated with a doubled risk of adverse event (HR, 95%CI: 2.1 (1.4-3.3), p=0.001). The rejection rates at 1y were similar between DCD- and DBD-LTs, (9.3% (35/375) versus 1,541 (8.7% (1,541/17,677), respectively). In highly selected recipient/donor pair, DCD transplantation is feasible and can achieve comparable survival to DBD transplantation. Biliary complications occurred at the expected rates. In the absence of selection, DCD-LTs outcomes remain worse than those of DBD-LTs.

Donation after circulatory death improves probability of heart transplantation in waitlisted candidates and results in post-transplant outcomes similar to those achieved with brain-dead donors

ObjectiveTo quantitate the impact of heart donation after circulatory death (DCD) donor utilization on both waitlist and post-transplant outcomes in the United States. MethodsThe United Network for Organ Sharing database was queried to identify all adult waitlisted and transplanted candidates between October 18, 2018, and December 31, 2022. Waitlisted candidates were stratified according to whether they had been approved for donation after brain death (DBD) offers only or also approved for DCD offers. The cumulative incidence of transplantation was compared between the 2 cohorts. In a post-transplant analysis, 1-year post-transplant survival was compared between unmatched and propensity-score-matched cohorts of DBD and DCD recipients. ResultsA total of 14,803 candidates were waitlisted, including 12,287 approved for DBD donors only and 2516 approved for DCD donors. Overall, DCD approval was associated with an increased sub-hazard ratio (HR) for transplantation and a lower sub-HR for delisting owing to death/deterioration after risk adjustment. In a subgroup analysis, candidates with blood type B and status 4 designation received the greatest benefit from DCD approval. A total of 12,238 recipients underwent transplantation, 11,636 with DBD hearts and 602 with DCD hearts. Median waitlist times were significantly shorter for status 3 and status 4 recipients receiving DCD hearts. One-year post-transplant survival was comparable between unmatched and propensity score–matched cohorts of DBD and DCD recipients. ConclusionsThe use of DCD hearts confers a higher probability of transplantation and a lower incidence of death/deterioration while on the waitlist, particularly among certain subpopulations such as status 4 candidates. Importantly, the use of DCD donors results in similar post-transplant survival as DBD donors.