Offer Acceptance Patterns for Liver Donors Aged 70 and Older

Decreased Utilization Rate of Grafts for Liver Transplantation After Implementation of Acuity Circle-based Allocation

BACKGROUND

The allocation system for livers began using acuity circles (AC) in 2020. In this study, we sought to evaluate the impact of AC policy on the utilization rate for liver transplantation (LT).

METHODS

Using the US national registry data between 2018 and 2022, LTs were equally divided into 2 eras: pre-AC (before February 4, 2020) and post-AC (February 4, 2020, and after). Deceased potential liver donors were defined as deceased donors from whom at least 1 organ was procured.

RESULTS

The annual number of deceased potential liver donors increased post-AC (from 10 423 to 12 259), approaching equal to that of new waitlist registrations for LT (n = 12 801). Although the discard risk index of liver grafts was comparable between the pre- and post-AC eras, liver utilization rates in donation after brain death (DBD) and donation after circulatory death (DCD) donors were lower post-AC ( P  < 0.01; 79.8% versus 83.4% and 23.7% versus 26.0%, respectively). Recipient factors, ie, no recipient located, recipient determined unsuitable, or time constraints, were more likely to be reasons for nonutilization after implementation of the AC allocation system compared to the pre-AC era (20.0% versus 12.3% for DBD donors and 50.1% versus 40.8% for DCD donors). Among non-high-volume centers, centers with lower utilization of marginal DBD donors or DCD donors were more likely to decrease LT volume post-AC.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the number of deceased potential liver donors has increased, overall liver utilization among deceased donors has decreased in the post-AC era. To maximize the donor pool for LT, future efforts should target specific reasons for liver nonutilization.

Beyond donation to organ utilization in the USA

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The deceased donor organ pool has broadened beyond young, otherwise healthy head trauma victims. But an abundance of donated organs only benefits patients if they are accepted, expeditiously transported and actually transplanted. This review focuses on postdonation challenges and opportunities to increase the number of transplants through improved organ utilization.

RECENT FINDINGS

We build upon recently proposed changes in terminology for measuring organ utilization. Among organs recovered for transplant, the nonuse rate (NUR REC ) has risen above 25% for kidneys and pancreata. Among donors, the nonuse rate (NUR DON ) has risen to 40% for livers and exceeds 70% for thoracic organs. Programme-level variation in offer acceptance rates vastly exceeds variation in the traditional, 1-year survival benchmark. Key opportunities to boost utilization include donation after circulatory death and hepatitis C virus (HCV)+ organs; acute kidney injury and suboptimal biopsy kidneys; older and steatotic livers.

SUMMARY

Underutilization of less-than-ideal, yet transplant-worthy organs remains an obstacle to maximizing the impact of the U.S. transplant system. The increased risk of inferior posttransplant outcomes must always be weighed against the risks of remaining on the waitlist. Advanced perfusion technologies; tuning allocation systems for placement efficiency; and data-driven clinical decision support have the potential to increase utilization of medically complex organs.

The impact of hepatitis C virus direct acting agents in liver transplant using very old donor grafts: a real-world single-center analysis

The correct timing of use of direct acting agents (DAAs) among transplanted patients remains unknown. The aim of this paperwork is to evaluate the impact of DAAs treatment in pre- or peri-operative period in liver transplantation when grafts ≥ 70 years are used. This is a retrospective analysis comparing adult liver transplant performed for HCV-related cirrhosis and/or hepatocarcinoma using a graft ≥ 70 in the period 2015-2018 (Group DAA-HCV-OLD, study group) to three different groups: (a) anti-HCV-Ab-negative patients receiving graft ≥ 70 (no-HCV-OLD), (b) anti-HCV-Ab-negative patients receiving a graft aged 18-69 years (no-HCV-YOUNG), and (c) anti-HCV-Ab-positive patients receiving a donor graft ≥ 70 in the period 2007-2011 (no-DAA-HCV-OLD). Totally, 528 liver transplants were considered: 164 in DAA-HCV-OLD, 143 in no-HCV-OLD, 120 in no-HCV-YOUNG and 101 in no-DAA-HCV-OLD Group. Graft survival rates at 1 and 3 years were 88% and 81% in DAA-HCV-OLD Group, 82% and 68% in no-DAA-HCV-OLD (p = 0.007), 89% and 84% in no-HCV-OLD (p = 0.76), and 94% and 92% in no-HCV-YOUNG (p = 0.02). No differences were observed among groups in the incidence of primary non-function, primary dysfunction, vascular or biliary complications. DAAs were able to zero HCV-related graft loss, with a 3-year graft survival > 80%. The outcomes of older graft recipients became equal irrespectively of their HCV serological status.