The Volume-outcome Relationship in Deceased Donor Kidney Transplantation and Implications for Regionalization

Outcome-Orientated Organ Allocation-A Composite Risk Model for Pancreas Graft Evaluation and Acceptance

Background: Pancreas transplantation (PTX) remains the most effective treatment to prevent long-term complications and provide consistent euglycemia in patients with endocrine pancreatic insufficiency, mainly in type I diabetic patients. Considering early graft loss (EGL) and the perioperative complication rate, an optimal risk stratification based on donor risk factors is paramount. Methods: In our single-center study, we retrospectively assessed the risk factors for EGL and reduced graft survival in 97 PTXs (82 simultaneous pancreas and kidney [SPK], 11 pancreases transplanted after kidney [PAK] and 4 pancreases transplanted alone [PTA]) between 2010 and 2021. By statistically analyzing the incorporation of different donor risk factors using the Kaplan-Meier method and a log-rank test, we introduced a composite risk model for the evaluation of offered pancreas grafts. Results: The overall EGL rate was 6.5%. In the univariate analysis of donor characteristics, age > 45 years, BMI > 25 kg/m2, lipase > 60 U/L, cerebrovascular accident (CVA) as the cause of death, mechanical cardiopulmonary resuscitation (mCPR), cold ischemia time (CIT) > 600 min and retrieval by another center were identified as potential risk factors; however, they lacked statistical significance. In a multivariate model, age > 45 years (HR 2.05, p = 0.355), BMI > 25 kg/m2 (HR 3.18, p = 0.051), lipase > 60 U/L (HR 2.32, p = 0.148), mCPR (HR 8.62, p < 0.0001) and CIT > 600 min (HR 1.89, p = 0.142) had the greatest impact on pancreas graft survival. We subsumed these factors in a composite risk model. The combination of three risk factors increased the rate of EGL significantly (p = 0.003). Comparing the pancreas graft survival curves for ≥3 risk factors to <3 risk factors in a Kaplan-Meier model revealed significant inferiority in the pancreas graft survival rate (p = 0.029). Conclusions: When evaluating a potential donor organ, grafts with a combination of three or more risk factors should only be accepted after careful consideration to reduce the risk of EGL and to significantly improve outcomes after PTX.

"Long-term effects of center volume on transplant outcomes in adult kidney transplant recipients"

BACKGROUND

The influence of center volume on kidney transplant outcomes is a topic of ongoing debate. In this study, we employed competing risk analyses to accurately estimate the marginal probability of graft failure in the presence of competing events, such as mortality from other causes with long-term outcomes. The incorporation of immunosuppression protocols and extended follow-up offers additional insights. Our emphasis on long-term follow-up aligns with biological considerations where competing risks play a significant role.

METHODS

We examined data from 219,878 adult kidney-only transplantations across 256 U.S. transplant centers (January 2001-December 2015) sourced from the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network registry. Centers were classified into quartiles by annual volume: low (Q1 = 28), medium (Q2 = 75), medium-high (Q3 = 121), and high (Q4 = 195). Our study investigated the relationship between center volume and 5-year outcomes, focusing on graft failure and mortality. Sub-population analyses included deceased donors, living donors, diabetic recipients, those with kidney donor profile index >85%, and re-transplants from deceased donors.

RESULTS

Adjusted cause-specific hazard ratios (aCHR) for Five-Year Graft Failure and Patient Death were examined by center volume, with low-volume centers as the reference standard (aCHR: 1.0). In deceased donors, medium-high and high-volume centers showed significantly lower cause-specific hazard ratios for graft failure (medium-high aCHR = 0.892, p<0.001; high aCHR = 0.953, p = 0.149) and patient death (medium-high aCHR = 0.828, p<0.001; high aCHR = 0.898, p = 0.003). Among living donors, no significant differences were found for graft failure, while a trend towards lower cause-specific hazard ratios for patient death was observed in medium-high (aCHR = 0.895, p = 0.107) and high-volume centers (aCHR = 0.88, p = 0.061).

CONCLUSION

Higher center volume is associated with significantly lower cause-specific hazard ratios for graft failure and patient death in deceased donors, while a trend towards reduced cause-specific hazard ratios for patient death is observed in living donors.

Kidney transplantation in Icelandic patients, 2000-2019: are outcomes affected by low volume?

Background

In Iceland, a small number of kidney transplants from living donors (LDs) are performed at Landspitali University Hospital (LUH) in Reykjavik, while deceased donor transplants have until recently invariably been carried out abroad. In this study, we evaluated the outcome of kidney transplantation in Icelandic patients.

Methods

This was a retrospective study that included all Icelandic residents who underwent kidney transplantation between 1 January 2000 and 31 December 2019. Data were obtained from the Icelandic End-Stage Kidney Disease Registry, medical records at LUH, and the Scandiatransplant database. The Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration equation was used to calculate estimated glomerular filtration rate from serum creatinine for recipients and donors aged >18 years, and the modified Schwartz equation for those aged ≤18 years. Survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and the log-rank test was employed for group comparisons.

Results

A total of 229 kidney transplants in 221 patients were performed during the 20-year period, of which 135 (58.9%) were from LDs. Transplants carried out at LUH were 118 (51.5%), of which 116 were from LDs. During a median follow-up of 7.4 years (range 0.1-20), 27 (12.2%) patients died, 20 (74%) of whom had a functioning graft. One-year patient survival was 99.1% [95% confidence interval (CI), 97.9-100], 5-year survival was 95.7% (95% CI, 92.7-98.7), and 10-year survival was 87.7% (95% CI, 82.4-93.4). Death-censored graft survival was 98.3% (95% CI, 96.6-100), 96.8% (95% CI, 94.4-99.2), and 89.2% (95% CI, 84.1-94.7) at 1, 5, and 10 years, respectively.

Conclusions

Patient and graft survival are comparable with those of large transplant centers, demonstrating the feasibility of running a quality kidney transplant program in a small nation in collaboration with a larger center abroad.

Twelve Thousand Kidney Transplants Over More Than 55 Y: A Single-center Experience

Background

Kidney transplant outcomes have dramatically improved since the first successful transplant in 1954. In its early years, kidney transplantation was viewed more skeptically. Today it is considered the treatment of choice among patients with end-stage kidney disease.

Methods

Our program performed its first kidney transplant in 1966 and recently performed our 12 000th kidney transplant. Here, we review and describe our experience with these 12 000 transplants. Transplant recipients were analyzed by decade of date of transplant: 1966-1975, 1976-1985, 1986-1995, 1996-2005, 2006-2015, and 2016-2022. Death-censored graft failure and mortality were outcomes of interest.

Results

Of 12 000 kidneys, 247 were transplanted from 1966 to 1975, 1147 from 1976 to 1985, 2194 from 1986 to 1995, 3147 from 1996 to 2005, 3046 from 2006 to 2015, and 2219 from 2016 to 2022 compared with 1966-1975, there were statistically significant and progressively lower risks of death-censored graft failure at 1 y, 5 y, and at last follow-up in all subsequent eras. Although mortality at 1 y was lower in all subsequent eras after 1986-1995, there was no difference in mortality at 5 y or the last follow-up between eras.

Conclusions

In this large cohort of 12 000 kidneys from a single center, we observed significant improvement in outcomes over time. Kidney transplantation remains a robust and ever-growing and improving field.

Simultaneous Heart-Kidney Transplant-Does Hospital Experience With Heart Transplant or Kidney Transplant Have a Greater Impact on Patient Outcomes?

High institutional transplant volume is associated with improved outcomes in isolated heart and kidney transplant. The aim of this study was to assess trends and outcomes of simultaneous heart-kidney transplant (SHKT) nationally, as well as the impact of institutional heart and kidney transplant volume on survival. All adult patients who underwent SHKT between 2005-2019 were identified using the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) database. Annual institutional volumes in single organ transplant were determined. Univariate and multivariable analyses were conducted to assess the impact of demographics, comorbidities, and institutional transplant volumes on 1-year survival. 1564 SHKT were identified, increasing from 54 in 2005 to 221 in 2019. In centers performing SHKT, median annual heart transplant volume was 35.0 (IQR 24.0-56.0) and median annual kidney transplant volume was 166.0 (IQR 89.5-224.0). One-year survival was 88.4%. In multivariable analysis, increasing heart transplant volume, but not kidney transplant volume, was associated with improved 1-year survival. Increasing donor age, dialysis requirement, ischemic times, and bilirubin were also independently associated with reduced 1-year survival. Based on this data, high-volume heart transplant centers may be better equipped with managing SHKT patients than high-volume kidney transplant centers.

Association of Operative Volume and Odds of Surgical Complication for Patients Undergoing Repair of Pectus Excavatum at Children's Hospitals

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether procedure-specific provider volume is associated with outcomes for patients undergoing repair of pectus excavatum at tertiary care children's hospitals.

STUDY DESIGN

We performed a cohort study of patients undergoing repair of pectus excavatum between January 1, 2013 and December 31, 2019, at children's hospitals using the Pediatric Health Information System database. The main exposures were the pectus excavatum repair volume quartile of the patient's hospital and the pectus excavatum repair volume category of their surgeon. Our primary outcome was surgical complication, identified using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification, and International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification codes from Pediatric Health Information System. Secondary outcomes included high-cost admission and extended length of stay.

RESULTS

In total, 7183 patients with an average age of 15.2 years (SD 2.0), 83% male, 74% non-Hispanic White, 68% no comorbidities, 72% private insurance, and 82% from metro areas were analyzed. Compared with the lowest-volume (≤10 cases/year) quartile of hospitals, patients undergoing repair of pectus excavatum at hospitals in the second (>10-18 cases/year), third (>18-26 cases/year), and fourth (>26 cases/year) volume quartiles had decreased odds of complication of OR 0.52 (CI 0.34-0.82), 0.51 (CI 0.33-0.78), and 0.41 (CI 0.27-0.62), respectively. Patients with pectus excavatum who underwent repair by surgeons in the second (>1-5 cases/year), third (>5-10 cases/year), and fourth (>10 cases/year) volume categories had decreased odds of complication of OR 0.91 (CI 0.68-1.20), OR 0.73 (CI 0.51-1.04), and OR 0.55 (CI 0.39-0.76), respectively, compared with the lowest-volume (≤1 case/year) category of surgeons.

CONCLUSIONS

Procedure-specific case volume is an important factor when considering providers for elective surgery, even among specialized centers providing comprehensive patient care.

First World Consensus Conference on pancreas transplantation: Part II - recommendations

The First World Consensus Conference on Pancreas Transplantation provided 49 jury deliberations regarding the impact of pancreas transplantation on the treatment of diabetic patients, and 110 experts' recommendations for the practice of pancreas transplantation. The main message from this consensus conference is that both simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplantation (SPK) and pancreas transplantation alone can improve long-term patient survival, and all types of pancreas transplantation dramatically improve the quality of life of recipients. Pancreas transplantation may also improve the course of chronic complications of diabetes, depending on their severity. Therefore, the advantages of pancreas transplantation appear to clearly surpass potential disadvantages. Pancreas after kidney transplantation increases the risk of mortality only in the early period after transplantation, but is associated with improved life expectancy thereafter. Additionally, preemptive SPK, when compared to SPK performed in patients undergoing dialysis, appears to be associated with improved outcomes. Time on dialysis has negative prognostic implications in SPK recipients. Increased long-term survival, improvement in the course of diabetic complications, and amelioration of quality of life justify preferential allocation of kidney grafts to SPK recipients. Audience discussions and live voting are available online at the following URL address: http://mediaeventi.unipi.it/category/1st-world-consensus-conference-of-pancreas-transplantation/246.

Definition and Analysis of Textbook Outcome: A Novel Quality Measure in Kidney Transplantation

BACKGROUND

"Textbook outcome" (TO) is a novel composite quality measure that encompasses multiple postoperative endpoints, representing the ideal "textbook" hospitalization for complex surgical procedures. We defined TO for kidney transplantation using a cohort from a high-volume institution.

METHODS

Adult patients who underwent isolated kidney transplantation at our institution between 2016 and 2019 were included. TO was defined by clinician consensus at our institution to include freedom from intraoperative complication, postoperative reintervention, 30-day intensive care unit or hospital readmission, length of stay > 75th percentile of kidney transplant patients, 90-day mortality, 30-day acute rejection, delayed graft function, and discharge with a Foley catheter. Recipient, operative, financial characteristics, and post-transplant patient, graft, and rejection-free survival were compared between patients who achieved and failed to achieve TO.

RESULTS

A total of 557 kidney transplant patients were included. Of those, 245 (44%) achieved TO. The most common reasons for TO failure were delayed graft function (N = 157, 50%) and hospital readmission within 30 days (N = 155, 50%); the least common was mortality within 90 days (N = 6, 2%). Patient, graft, and rejection-free survival were significantly improved among patients who achieved TO. On average, patients who achieved TO incurred approximately $50,000 less in total inpatient charges compared to those who failed TO.

CONCLUSIONS

TO in kidney transplantation was associated with favorable post-transplant outcomes and significant cost-savings. TO may offer transplant centers a detailed performance breakdown to identify aspects of perioperative care in need of process improvement.

Association of balanced abdominal organ transplant center volumes with patient outcomes

BACKGROUND

The volume-outcome relationship for organ-specific transplantation is well-described; it is unknown if the relative balance of kidney compared with liver volumes within an institution relates to organ-specific outcomes. We assessed the association between relative balance within a transplant center and outcomes.

METHODS

National retrospective analysis of isolated kidney and liver transplants in United States 2005-2014 followed through 2019. Latent class analysis defined transplant center phenotypes. Multivariate Cox models estimated death-censored graft loss and mortality.

RESULTS

Latent class analysis identified four phenotypes: kidney only (n = 117), kidney dominant (n = 36), mixed/balanced (n = 90), and liver dominant (n = 13). Compared to mixed centers, the risk of kidney graft loss was higher at kidney-dominant (HR 1.07, p < .001) and liver-dominant (HR 1.10, p < .001) centers, while kidney-only (HR 1.06, p = .01) centers had higher mortality. Liver graft loss was not associated with phenotype, but risk of patient death was lower (HR 0.93, p = .02) at liver dominant and higher (HR 1.06, p = .02) at kidney-dominant centers.

CONCLUSIONS

A mixed phenotype was associated with improved kidney transplant outcomes, whereas liver transplant outcomes were best at liver-dominant centers. While these findings need to be verified with center-level resources, optimization of shared resources could improve patient and organ outcomes.

Most pediatric transplant centers are low volume, adult-focused, and in proximity to higher volume pediatric centers

BACKGROUND

Independent studies provide evidence that low volume pediatric solid organ transplant centers have inferior outcomes compared to high volume pediatric centers. The study assessed whether patients treated at low volume pediatric centers have access to higher volume pediatric centers, which offer potentially better outcomes.

METHODS

We analyzed center specific data on 467 pediatric solid organ transplant centers in the U.S using the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network database from 2002 to 2014. The proximities of low volume pediatric centers to high volume pediatric centers were determined using Maptive, a tool based on Google Maps.

RESULTS

Most low volume pediatric transplant centers focused on transplantation of adults (84% heart, 83% liver, and 93% kidney programs). A majority of low volume pediatric centers (77% for heart, 53% for lung, 68% for liver and 90% for kidney) were within 150 miles of high volume centers. Among all children listed for transplantation, 30.7% were listed in low volume pediatric centers. Most low volume pediatric centers are adult focused and near high volume pediatric centers.

CONCLUSION

We need greater scrutiny of outcomes, particularly waitlist outcomes, of low volume pediatric solid organ transplant centers located close to high volume pediatric solid organ transplant centers.

TYPE OF STUDY AND LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Retrospective Comparative Study, Level III.

Obese living kidney donors: a comparison of hand-assisted retroperitoneoscopic versus laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy

Background

The aim of this study was to examine the difference in outcome between hand-assisted retroperitoneoscopic and laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy in obese donors, and the impact of donor body mass index on outcome.

Methods

Out of 1108 living donors who underwent hand-assisted retroperitoneoscopic or laparoscopic donor nephrectomy between 2010 and 2018, 205 were identified having body mass index ≥ 30. These donors were included in this retrospective study, analyzing postoperative outcomes and remnant renal function.

Results

Out of 205 donors, 137 (66.8%) underwent hand-assisted retroperitoneoscopic donor nephrectomy and 68 donors (33.2%) underwent laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. Postoperative outcome did not show any significant differences between the hand-assisted retroperitoneoscopic donor nephrectomy group and the laparoscopic donor nephrectomy group in terms of major complications (2.2% vs. 1.5%, P = 0.72), postoperative pain scale (4 vs. 4, P = 0.67), and the length of stay (3 days vs. 3 days, P = 0.075). The results of kidney function in donors after nephrectomy demonstrated no significant differences between the groups. Additional analysis of 29 donors with body mass index ≥ 35 (14.1%) as compared with 176 donors with body mass index 30–35 (85.9%) revealed no significant differences between groups in postoperative outcomes as well as kidney function after donation.

Conclusion

Our results show that laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy for obese donors is safe and feasible with good postoperative outcomes. There were no significant differences regarding postoperative outcome between hand-assisted retroperitoneoscopic and laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. Furthermore, the outcome in donors with body mass index ≥ 35 was comparable to donors with body mass index 30–35.

Effect of Institutional Kidney Transplantation Case-Volume on Post-Transplant Graft Failure: a Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

The impact of institutional case volume to graft failure rate after adult kidney transplantation is relatively unclear compared to other solid organ transplantations.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study of 13,872 adult kidney transplantations in Korea was performed. Institutions were divided into low- (< 24 cases/year), medium- (24-60 cases/year), and high- (> 60 cases/year) volume centers depending on the annual case volume. One-year graft failure rate was defined as the proportion of patients who required dialysis or re-transplantation at one year after transplantation. Postoperative in-hospital mortality and long-term graft survival were also measured.

RESULTS

After adjustment, one year graft failure was higher in low-volume centers significantly (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.50; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.26-1.78; P < 0.001) and medium-volume centers (aOR, 1.87; 95% CI, 1.57-2.23; P < 0.001) compared to high-volume centers. Low-volume centers had significantly higher mortality (aOR, 1.75; 95% CI, 1.15-2.66; P = 0.01) than that of high-volume centers after adjustment. Long-term graft survival of up to 9 years was superior in high-volume centers compared to low- and medium-volume centers (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Higher-case volume centers were associated with lower one-year graft failure rate, lower in-hospital mortality, and higher long-term graft survival after kidney transplantation.

Association of Kidney Transplant Center Volume With 3-Year Clinical Outcomes

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE

A robust relationship between procedure volume and clinical outcomes has been demonstrated across many surgical fields. This study assessed whether a center volume-outcome relationship exists for contemporary kidney transplantation, specifically for diabetic recipients, older recipients (aged ≥65 years), and recipients of high kidney donor profile index (KDPI ≥ 85) kidneys.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING & PARTICIPANTS

Adult kidney-only transplant recipients who underwent transplantation between 2009 and 2013 (N = 79,581).

EXPOSURES

The primary exposure variable was center volume, categorized into quartiles based on the total kidney transplantation volume. Quartile 1 (Q1) centers performed a mean of fewer than 66 kidney transplantations per year, whereas Q4 centers performed a mean of more than 196 kidney transplantations per year.

OUTCOMES

All-cause graft failure and mortality within 3 years of transplantation.

ANALYTICAL APPROACH

Multivariable Cox frailty models were used to adjust for donor characteristics, recipient characteristics, and cold ischemia time.

RESULTS

Minor differences in rates of 3-year deceased donor all-cause graft failure across quartiles of center volume were observed (14.9% for Q1 vs 16.7% for Q4), including in subgroups (diabetic recipients, 18.4% for Q1 vs 19.7% for Q4; older recipients, 19.4% for Q1 vs 22.5% for Q4; recipients of high KDPI kidneys, 26.5% for Q1 vs 26.5% for Q4). Results were similar for 3-year mortality. After adjustment for donor, recipient, and graft characteristics using Cox regression, center volume was not significantly associated with all-cause graft failure or mortality within 3 years, except that diabetic recipients at Q3 centers had slightly lower mortality (compared with Q1 centers, adjusted HR of 0.85 [95% CI, 0.73-0.99]).

LIMITATIONS

Potential unmeasured confounding from patient comorbid conditions and organ selection.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings provide little evidence that care in higher volume centers is associated with better adjusted outcomes for kidney transplant recipients, even in populations anticipated to be at increased risk for graft failure or death.