Textbook Outcome as a Quality Metric in Living and Deceased Donor Kidney Transplantation

Textbook Outcomes in Solid Transplantation: A Systematic Review

Background

The concept of TO is expanding across various surgical disciplines to establish a standardized, comprehensive quality benchmark. Traditional metrics such as 1-y patient and graft survival have been key for evaluating transplant program performance but are now deemed inadequate because of significant field advancements. This systematic review aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of the applicability and validity of textbook outcome (TO) in the setting of solid organ transplantation.

Methods

A structured search, adhering to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, was conducted across PubMed, Embase, and Scopus databases on March 10, 2024.

Results

Fourteen articles were identified for inclusion in this review. Of these, 2 studies addressed TO in heart transplantation, 3 in lung transplantation, 2 in kidney transplantation, and 7 in liver transplantation. A subgroup analysis was conducted to categorize the different definitions of TOs and identify the most common reasons for TO failure.

Conclusions

Our systematic review highlights the ongoing efforts in the field of solid organ transplantation to define TO and emphasizes the importance of developing a universally recognized set of TO criteria for each type of transplant. TO provides a valuable framework for transplant centers to benchmark their performance against similar institutions on a risk-adjusted basis and to pinpoint specific areas for enhancing patient outcomes. Even the most successful programs may discover aspects within the composite outcome with scope for improvement.

Benchmark Outcomes in Deceased Donor Kidney Transplantation: A Multicenter Analysis of 80 996 Transplants From 126 Centers

Background

We defined clinically relevant benchmark values in deceased donor kidney transplantation (KT), to assess the best achievable results in low-risk patient cohorts from experienced centers.

Methods

We identified the "ideal" cases from the United Network for Organ Sharing Standard Transplant Analysis and Research files from centers performing ≥50 KT per year between 2010 and 2018. Cases have been selected based on the kidney donor profile index values (<35%), a cold ischemia time (CIT) ≤18 h, a HLA mismatch ≤4, and excluding blood group (ABO) incompatible, dual and combined transplants. The outcomes of the benchmark cohort have been compared with a group of patients excluded from the benchmark cohort because but not meeting 1 or more of the abovementioned criteria.

Results

The 171 424 KT patients in the United Network for Organ Sharing Standard Transplant Analysis and Research files were screened and 8694 benchmark cases of a total of 80 996 KT (10.7%) from 126 centers meeting the selection criteria were identified. The benchmarks for 1-, 3-, and 5-y patient survival are ≥97%, ≥92.5%, and ≥86.7%, and ≥95.4%, ≥87.8%, and ≥79.6% for graft survival. Benchmark cutoff for hospital length of stay is ≤5 d, ≤23.6% for delayed graft function, and ≤7.5% and ≤9.1% for 6-mo and 1-y incidence of acute rejection. Overall 1-, 3-, and 5-y actuarial graft survivals were 96.6%, 91.1%, and 84.2% versus 93.5%, 85.4%, and 75.5% in the benchmark and comparison groups, respectively (P < 0.001). Overall 1-, 3-, and 5-y actuarial patient survivals were 98.1%, 94.8%, and 90.0% versus 96.6%, 91.1%, and 83.0% in the benchmark and comparison groups, respectively (P < 0.001).

Conclusions

For the first time, we quantified the best achievable postoperative results in an ideal scenario in deceased donor KT, aimed at improving the clinical practice guided by the comparison of center performances with the ideal outcomes defined.