Thirty-day readmission rates, trends and its impact on liver transplantation recipients: a national analysis

Clinician Prediction of Early Readmission Among Kidney and Liver Transplant Recipients

Introduction: Patients are at risk of hospital readmission after kidney and liver transplantation due to the complexity of posttransplant care. Currently, clinical practice relies on providers' prediction since there is a lack of specific strategies. However, the accuracy of clinicians' ability to predict readmissions using clinical judgment alone is unknown. Research Question: What is the accuracy of clinicians' ability to predict readmissions after transplantation using clinical judgment alone? Design: In 2019, clinical providers at a large, urban transplant center were electronically surveyed. Primary surgeons, nephrologists, transplant pharmacists, hepatologists, and nurses were asked, within 24 h of any kidney or liver transplant recipient discharge, to predict whether a patient would be readmitted within 30 days, and the suspected causes of readmission. Prediction accuracy was assessed by sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value, and F-score. Kappa scores were calculated to assess agreement between transplant surgeons and other providers. Results: Overall, N = 34 unique providers were surveyed about 148 kidney and 63 liver transplant recipients, and 27.0% of kidney recipients and 25.4% of liver recipients were readmitted within 30 days. The positive predictive values were low among clinical providers, ranging from 0.25 to 0.55. Agreements between providers were weak, but higher among kidney transplant providers (range: 0.42-0.44) than for liver transplant providers (range: -0.02-0.26). Conclusion: Clinical judgment alone to predict readmission among transplant recipients may not be sufficient and a combination of clinicians' predictions, multitiered discharge surveillance strategies and data-based predictive models may better identify high-risk patients and guide interventions to reduce readmission.

Evaluation of Factors Affecting Rehospitalization and Survival After Living Donor Liver Transplantation

BACKGROUND

Complications and comorbidities that may develop after living donor liver transplantation may necessitate rehospitalization after discharge. We aimed to investigate the demographic and clinical factors affecting rehospitalization after discharge.

METHODS

Two hundred seventy patients who underwent living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT) for end-stage liver cirrhosis were included in the study. Patients were divided into two groups as readmission group and others for statistical analysis. Age, gender, body mass index (BMI), model for end-stage liver disease (MELD), Child scores, etiology, blood product transfusion, anhepatic phase, cold ischemia time, operation time, graft-to-recipient weight ratio (GRWR), the type of recipient hepatic artery and hepatic vein utilized in the anastomoses, presence of liver segment 5, segment 8 and inferior accessory hepatic vein, presence of thrombosed, single or reconstructed portal vein, number of bile ducts, use of right, left/left lateral segment graft, postoperative intensive care unit and total hospitalization durations, surgical complications such as leakage/stricture, postoperative portal vein thrombosis, postoperative hepatic vein thrombosis, primary graft dysfunction, intra-abdominal hemorrhage, and postoperative early reoperation were statistically analyzed for readmission. In addition, patients with rehospitalization and others were statistically compared in terms of mortality and survival.

RESULTS

There was no statistical difference among etiologic factors, demographic findings, decompensation findings, comorbidities, perioperative findings, hospital durations, mortality, and survival (P > .05). Only patients with bile leakage/stricture had a statistically higher rehospitalization rate (P = .000).

CONCLUSION

Biliary complications are the most frequent cause of hospital rehospitalization following living donor liver transplantation.

Risk evaluation and recipient selection in adult liver transplantation: A mixed-methods survey

Background:

Liver transplant (LT) is the definitive treatment for end-stage liver disease. Limited resources and important post-operative implications for recipients compel judicious risk stratification and patient selection. However, little is known about the factors influencing physicians’ assessment regarding patient selection for LT and risk evaluation.

Methods:

We conducted a mixed-methods, cross-sectional survey involving Canadian hepatologists, anesthesiologists, LT surgeons, and French anesthesiologists. The survey contained quantitative questions and a vignette-based qualitative substudy about risk assessment and patient selection for LT. Descriptive statistics and qualitative content analyses were used.

Results:

We obtained answers from 129 physicians, and 63 participated in the qualitative substudy. We observed considerable variability in risk assessment prior to LT and identified many factors perceived to increase the risk of complications. Clinicians reported that the acceptable incidence of at least 1 severe post-operative complication for a LT program was 20% (95% CI: 20-30%). They identified the presence of any comorbidity as increasing the risk of different post-operative complications, especially acute kidney injury and cardiovascular complications. Frailty and functional disorders, severity of the liver disease, renal failure and cardiovascular comorbidities prior to LT emerged as important risk factors for post-operative morbidity. Most respondents were willing to pursue LT in patients with grade III acute-on-chronic liver failure but were less often willing to do so when faced with the uncertainty of a clinical example.

Conclusions:

Clinicians had a heterogeneous appraisal of the post-operative risk of complications following LT, as well as factors considered in risk assessment.

Risk Factors for Unplanned Readmission in Adult Liver Transplant Patients: A Retrospective Study

INTRODUCTION

Unplanned readmission is an important indicator for evaluating medical care quality. Adult liver transplant patients have high risk for readmission, which seriously affects their recovery. As there is currently a lack of research on risk factors for unplanned readmission of adult liver transplant patients in China, the purpose of this study was to elucidate such risk factors.

METHODS

Data for patients undergoing liver transplantation surgery at a tertiary hospital in Zhejiang Province from March 2018 to July 2022 were retrospectively collected. Patients were divided into readmission and nonreadmission groups based on whether unplanned readmission occurred within 90 days. Univariate analysis and logistic regression were used to analyze risk factors for unplanned readmission.

RESULTS

In total, 123 adult liver transplant patients were included; 38 had unplanned readmission, for a rate of 30.8%. There was a statistically significant difference between the groups in terms of age, educational level, operation time, intraoperative bleeding volume, number of complications, postoperative hospital stay, and hemoglobin (P < .05). Logistic regression analysis showed that age [OR = 1.085, 95% CI (1.022, 1.152)], operation time [OR = 1.010, 95% CI (1.001, 1.020)], postoperative hospital stay [OR = 1.124, 95% CI (1.023, 1.235)], and number of complications [OR = 4.487, 95% CI (1.234, 16.319)] were independent risk factors for unplanned readmission in adult liver transplant patients (P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

The current situation of unplanned readmission for adult liver transplant patients cannot be ignored, indicating that staff should identify risk factors for unplanned readmission as soon as possible and take targeted personalized measures and health education to reduce readmission risk.

Impact of Social Determinants of Health on Outcomes Following Resection for Hepatocellular Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

We sought to determine the impact of social determinants of health (SDoH) on outcomes of patients undergoing resection for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with HCC in the National Cancer Database who underwent resection from 2009 to 2018 were identified. SDoH associated with length of stay (LOS), 30-day readmission, and 30-day mortality were analyzed using regression analyses adjusted for confounding variables.

RESULTS

Among 9235 patients, the median age (range) was 65.0 (18-90) years, 72.1% were male, and 57.9% were White. A total of 3% were uninsured, 11.1% had Medicaid, 21% resided in regions with a median household income within the lowest quartile of the US population, and 27.0% resided in regions within the lowest quartile of education level. The odds for having longer LOS were lower among patients with the highest regional education level compared with those with the lowest level [odds ratio (OR) 0.86, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.77-0.97]. The risk of readmission was lower among patients with Medicare (OR 0.52; 95% CI 0.33-0.81), Medicaid (OR 0.52; 95% CI 0.31-0.87), or private insurance (OR 0.56; 95% CI 0.35-0.88) compared with uninsured patients. Thirty-day overall mortality was less likely among patients with Medicare (OR 0.45; 95% CI 0.27-0.75), Medicaid (OR 0.53; 95% CI 0.30-0.93), or private insurance (OR 0.40; 95% CI 0.24-0.66), and among patients with high regional income (OR 0.58; 95% CI 0.44-0.77).

CONCLUSIONS

Adjusted regression analyses identified SDoH that were associated with HCC outcomes. Increased awareness of how SDoH relate to outcomes may inform strategies that attempt to account for these associations and improve patient outcomes.

Incidence, predictors, and outcomes of early hospital readmissions after kidney transplantation: Systemic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Early hospital readmission (EHR) within 30 days after kidney transplantation is a significant quality indicator of transplant centers and patient care. This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the incidence, predictors, and outcomes of EHR after kidney transplantation.

METHODS

We comprehensively searched the databases, including PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Embase, from inception until December 2021 to identify studies that assessed incidence, risk factors, and outcome of EHR. The outcomes included death-censored graft failure and mortality. Data from each study were combined using the random effect to calculate the pooled incidence, mean difference (MD), odds ratio (OR), and hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence interval (CI).

RESULTS

A total of 17 studies were included. The pooled EHR incidence after kidney transplant was 24.4% (95% CI 21.7-27.3). Meta-analysis showed that recipient characteristics, including older recipient age (MD 2.05; 95% CI 0.90-3.20), Black race (OR 1.31; 95% CI 1.11, 1.55), diabetes (OR 1.32; 95% CI 1.22-1.43), and longer dialysis duration (MD 0.85; 95% CI 0.41, 1.29), donor characteristics, including older donor age (MD 2.02; 95% CI 0.93-3.11), and transplant characteristics, including delayed graft function (OR 1.75; 95% CI 1.42-2.16) and longer length of hospital stay during transplantation (MD 1.93; 95% CI 0.59-3.27), were significantly associated with the increased risk of EHR. EHR was significantly associated with the increased risk of death-censored graft failure (HR 1.70; 95% CI 1.43-2.02) and mortality (HR 1.46; 95% CI 1.27-1.67) within the first year after transplantation.

CONCLUSION

Almost one-fourth of kidney transplant recipients had EHR within 30 days after transplant, and they had worse post-transplant outcomes. Several risk factors for EHR were identified. This calls for future research to develop and implement for management strategies to reduce EHR in high-risk patients.

Enhanced recovery in liver transplantation: A value-based approach to complex surgical care

BACKGROUND

Value-based healthcare focuses on improving outcomes relative to cost. We aimed to study the impact of an enhanced recovery pathway for liver transplant recipients on providing value.

METHODS

In total, 379 liver recipients were identified: pre-enhanced recovery pathway (2017, n = 57) and post-enhanced recovery pathway (2018-2020, n = 322). The enhanced recovery pathway bundle was defined through multidisciplinary efforts and included optimal fluid management, end-of-case extubation, multimodal analgesia, and a standardized care pathway. Pre- and post-enhanced recovery pathway patients were compared with regard to extubation rates, lengths of stay, complications, readmissions, survival, and costs.

RESULTS

Pre- and post-enhanced recovery pathway recipient model for end-stage liver disease score and balance of risk scores were similar, although post-enhanced recovery pathway recipients had a higher median donor risk index (1.55 vs 1.39, P = .003). End-of-case extubation rates were 78% post-enhanced recovery pathway (including 91% in 2020) versus 5% pre-enhanced recovery pathway, with post-enhanced recovery pathway patients having decreased median intraoperative transfusion requirements (1,500 vs 3,000 mL, P < .001). Post-enhanced recovery pathway recipients had shorter median intensive care unit (1.6 vs 2.3 days, P = .01) and hospital stays (5.4 vs 8.0 days, P < .001). Incidence of severe (Clavien-Dindo ≥3) complications during the index hospitalization were similar between pre-enhanced recovery pathway versus post-enhanced recovery pathway groups (33% vs 23%, P = .13), as were 30-day readmissions (26% vs 33%, P = .44) and 1-year survival (93.0% vs 94.5%, P = .58). The post-enhanced recovery pathway cohort demonstrated a significant reduction in median direct cost per case ($11,406; P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Implementation of an enhanced recovery pathway in liver transplantation is feasible, safe, and effective in delivering value, even in the setting of complex surgical care.