Healthcare utilization after liver transplantation is highly variable among both centers and recipients

Health disparities in cirrhosis care and liver transplantation

Morbidity and mortality from cirrhosis are substantial and increasing. Health disparities in cirrhosis and liver transplantation are reflective of inequities along the entire spectrum of chronic liver disease care, from screening and diagnosis to prevention and treatment of liver-related complications. The key populations experiencing disparities in health status and healthcare delivery include racial and ethnic minority groups, sexual and gender minorities, people of lower socioeconomic status and underserved rural communities. These disparities lead to delayed diagnosis of chronic liver disease and complications of cirrhosis (for example, hepatocellular carcinoma), to differences in treatment of chronic liver disease and its complications, and ultimately to unequal access to transplantation for those with end-stage liver disease. Calling out these disparities is only the first step towards implementing solutions that can improve health equity and clinical outcomes for everyone. Multi-level interventions along the care continuum for chronic liver disease are needed to mitigate these disparities and provide equitable access to care.

Improved Outcomes and Resource Use With Normothermic Machine Perfusion in Liver Transplantation

Importance

Normothermic machine perfusion (NMP) has been shown to reduce peritransplant complications. Despite increasing NMP use in liver transplant (LT), there is a scarcity of real-world clinical experience data.

Objective

To compare LT outcomes between donation after brain death (DBD) and donation after circulatory death (DCD) allografts preserved with NMP or static cold storage (SCS).

Design, Setting, and Participants

This single-center, retrospective observational cohort study included all consecutive adult LTs performed between January 2019 and December 2023 at the Mayo Clinic in Arizona. Data analysis was performed between February 2024 and June 2024. Outcomes of DBD-SCS, DBD-NMP, DCD-SCS, and DCD-NMP transplants were compared.

Exposure

DBD and DCD livers preserved on NMP or SCS.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcomes were early allograft dysfunction (EAD), intraoperative transfusion, and post-LT hospital resource use, including length of stay (LOS) and readmissions. Secondary outcomes included acute kidney injury (AKI) and 1-year graft and patient survival.

Results

A total of 1086 LTs were included in the following 4 groups: DBD-SCS (n = 480), DBD-NMP (n = 63), DCD-SCS (n = 264), and DCD-NMP (n = 279). Among LT recipients, median (IQR) age was 60.0 years (52.0-66.0); 399 LT recipients (36.7%) were female. DCD-NMP had the lowest EAD rate (17.5%), followed by DCD-SCS (50.0%), DBD-NMP (36.8%), and DBD-SCS (27.3%) (P < .001). DCD-NMP had the lowest intraoperative transfusion requirement compared to all other groups. Hospital and intensive care unit (ICU) LOS were shortest in DCD-NMP (median [IQR] hospital LOS, 5.0 days [4.0-7.0]; P = .01; median [IQR] ICU LOS, 1.5 days [1.2-3.1]; P = .01). One-year cumulative readmission probability was 86% lower for DCD-NMP vs DCD-SCS (95% CI, 0.09-0.22; P < .001) and 53% lower for DBD-NMP vs DBD-SCS (95% CI, 0.26-0.87; P < .001). AKI events were lower in DCD-NMP (31.1%) vs DCD-SCS (47.4%) (P = .001). Compared to SCS, the NMP group had a 78% overall reduction in graft failure (hazard ratio [HR], 0.22; 95% CI, 0.10-0.49; P < .001). For those receiving DCD allografts, the risk reduction was even more pronounced, with an 87% decrease in graft failure (HR, 0.13; 95% CI, 0.05-0.33; P < .001). NMP was significantly protective from patient mortality vs SCS (HR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.12-0.80; P = .02).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this observational high-volume cohort study, NMP significantly improved LT clinical outcomes and reduced hospital resource use, especially in DCD allografts. NMP may enhance access to LT by addressing the challenges historically linked with DCD liver use.

Healthcare Contact Days Before and After Liver Transplant in Patients With Cirrhosis: A National Cohort Study

INTRODUCTION

"Healthcare contact days" is a patient-centered quantitative proxy for time toxicity, which can be informative for liver transplant (LT) decision-making. We aimed to (i) quantify contact days in patients with cirrhosis pre-LT and post-LT and (ii) identify clinical and demographic features associated with contact days.

METHODS

Using a national health system database, we calculated healthcare contact days (inpatient, outpatient hospital [e.g. observation], ambulatory, emergency, mental health, other) for patients with cirrhosis before and after LT.

RESULTS

Between 2008 and 2023, 2,708 patients underwent LT (median age 59 years [interquartile range 52-65], 66% male, 68% non-Hispanic White). Total mean contact days were 76.0 (SD, 58.6) 1 year pre-LT, increasing to 92.3 (SD, 63.2) 1 year post-LT, then decreasing to 39.7 (SD, 43.3) and 30.9 (SD, 35.6) 2 years and 3 years post-LT, respectively. The mean inpatient contact days were 33.6 (SD, 47.5) 1 year pre-LT, increasing to 49.6 (SD, 59.1) 1 year post-LT, then decreasing to 11.9 (SD, 32.0) and 6.7 (SD, 19.8) 2 years and 3 years post-LT, respectively. In multivariable analysis, pre-LT contact days were not associated with post-LT days (incidence rate ratio [IRR] 1.00 [1.00-1.00]). Post-LT, female gender (IRR 1.09 [1.03-1.15]), Black race (IRR 1.11 [1.00-1.23]), and pre-LT dialysis (IRR 1.21 [1.10-1.34]) were associated with increased total contact days.

DISCUSSION

Healthcare contact days provide interpretable prognostic information to inform expectations regarding LT for cirrhosis and can be useful for patients, providers, and policymakers alike.

Days at home after surgery as a perioperative outcome: scoping review and recommendations for use in health services research

BACKGROUND

Days at home after surgery is a promising new patient-centred outcome metric that measures time spent outside of healthcare institutions and mortality. The aim of this scoping review was to synthesize the use of days at home in perioperative research and evaluate how it has been termed, defined, and validated, with a view to inform future use.

METHODS

The search was run on MEDLINE, Embase, and Scopus on 30 March 2023 to capture all perioperative research where days at home or equivalent was measured. Days at home was defined as any outcome where time spent outside of hospitals and/or healthcare institutions was calculated.

RESULTS

A total of 78 articles were included. Days at home has been increasingly used, with most studies published in 2022 (35, 45%). Days at home has been applied in multiple study design types, with varying terminology applied. There is variability in how days at home has been defined, with variation in measures of healthcare utilization incorporated across studies. Poor reporting was noted, with 14 studies (18%) not defining how days at home was operationalized and 18 studies (23%) not reporting how death was handled. Construct and criterion validity were demonstrated across seven validation studies in different surgical populations.

CONCLUSION

Days at home after surgery is a robust, flexible, and validated outcome measure that is being increasingly used as a patient-centred metric after surgery. With growing use, there is also growing variability in terms used, definitions applied, and reporting standards. This review summarizes these findings to work towards coordinating and standardizing the use of days at home after surgery as a patient-centred policy and research tool.

PAs and NPs in liver transplantation: Perceptions, implementation, and effect

OBJECTIVES

This study assessed the use and perceptions of physician associates/assistants (PAs) and NPs at liver transplant centers and sought to determine their financial effect.

METHODS

Leaders of liver transplant programs performing 25 or more transplants in 2020 were contacted to complete an 11-question survey about the role and effect of PAs and NPs in liver transplant. A single-center retrospective analysis compared length of stay (LOS) and readmission rates for primary liver transplants and simultaneous liver-kidney transplants before and after a dedicated PA team was established. Chi-square and t -test analyses were performed.

RESULTS

The survey achieved a 77% response rate, and 98% of institutions reported using PAs and NPs. The single-center study found the mean LOS post-transplant was significantly shorter in the post-PA cohort ( P = .0005). No significant difference was found in 30-day readmission rates.

CONCLUSIONS

PAs and NPs are used broadly across the post-liver transplant care continuum. Using LOS as a surrogate financial marker suggests that a dedicated PA and NP team may contribute to cost savings.

The burden of significant pain in the cirrhosis population: Risk factors, analgesic use, and impact on health care utilization and clinical outcomes

BACKGROUND

We aimed to characterize pain and analgesic use in a large contemporary cohort of patients with cirrhosis and to associate pain with unplanned health care utilization and clinical outcomes in this population.

METHODS

We included all patients with cirrhosis seen in UCSF hepatology clinics from 2013 to 2020. Pain severity and location were determined using documented pain scores at the initial visit; "significant pain" was defined as moderate or severe using established cutoffs. Demographic, clinical, and medication data were abstracted from electronic medical records. Associations between significant pain and our primary outcome of 1-year unplanned health care utilization (ie, emergency department visit or hospitalization) and our secondary outcomes of mortality and liver transplantation were explored in multivariable models.

RESULTS

Among 5333 patients with cirrhosis, 32% had a nonzero pain score at their initial visit and 25% had significant (ie moderate/severe) pain. Sixty percent of patients with significant pain used ≥1 analgesic; 34% used opioids. Patients with cirrhosis with significant pain had similar Model for End-Stage Liver Disease-Sodium scores (14 vs. 13), but higher rates of decompensation (65% vs. 55%). The most common pain location was the abdomen (44%). Patients with abdominal pain, compared to pain in other locations, were more likely to have decompensation (72% vs. 56%). Significant pain was independently associated with unplanned health care utilization (adjusted odds ratio: 1.3, 95% CI: 1.1-1.5) and mortality (adjusted hazard ratio: 1.4, 95% CI: 1.2-1.6).

CONCLUSIONS

Pain among patients with cirrhosis is often not well-controlled despite analgesic use, and significant pain is associated with unplanned health care utilization and mortality in this population. Effectively identifying and treating pain are essential in reducing costs and improving quality of life and outcomes among patients with cirrhosis.

Transplant center variability in utilizing nonstandard donors and its impact on the transplantation of patients with lower MELD scores

There is a subset of patients with lower MELD scores who are at substantial risk of waitlist mortality. In order to transplant such patients, transplant centers must utilize "nonstandard" donors (eg, living donors, donation after circulatory death), which are traditionally offered to those patients who are not at the top of the waitlist. We used Organ Procurement and Transplantation data to evaluate center-level and region-level variability in the utilization of nonstandard donors and its impact on MELD at transplant among adult liver-alone non-status 1 patients transplanted from April 1, 2020, to September 30, 2022. The center-level variability in the utilization of nonstandard donors was 4-fold greater than the center-level variability in waitlisting practices (waitlistings with a MELD score of <20). While there was a moderate correlation between center-level waitlisting and transplantation of patients with a MELD score of <20 ( p = 0.58), there was a strong correlation between center-level utilization of nonstandard donors and center-level transplantation of patients with a MELD score of <20 ( p = 0.75). This strong correlation between center-level utilization of "nonstandard" donors and center-level transplantation of patients with a MELD score of <20 was limited to regions 2, 4, 5, 9, and 11. Transplant centers that utilize more nonstandard donors are more likely to successfully transplant patients at lower MELD scores. Public reporting of these data could benefit patients, caregivers, and referring providers, and be used to help maximize organ utilization.

Days Alive and Out of the Hospital After Heart Transplantation: A Retrospective Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

Evaluate days alive and out of the hospital (DAOH) as an outcome measure after orthotopic heart transplantation in patients with mechanical circulatory support (MCS) as a bridge to transplant compared to those patients without prior MCS.

DESIGN

A retrospective observational study of adult patients who underwent cardiac transplantation between January 1, 2015, and January 1, 2020. The primary outcome was DAOH at 365 days (DAOH365) after an orthotopic heart transplant. A Poisson regression model was fitted to detect the association between independent variables and DAOH365.

SETTING

An academic tertiary referral center.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 235 heart transplant patients were included-103 MCS as a bridge to transplant patients, and 132 direct orthotopic heart transplants without prior MCS.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The median DAOH365 for the entire cohort was 348 days (IQR 335.0-354.0). There was no difference in DAOH365 between the MCS patients and patients without MCS (347.0 days [IQR 336.0-353.0] v 348.0 days [IQR 334.0-354.0], p = 0.43). Multivariate analysis identified patients who underwent a transplant after the 2018 heart transplant allocation change, pretransplant pulmonary hypertension, and increased total ischemic time as predictors of reduced DAOH365.

CONCLUSIONS

In this analysis of patients undergoing orthotopic heart transplantation, there was no significant difference in DAOH365 in patients with prior MCS as a bridge to transplant compared to those without MCS. Incorporating days alive and out of the hospital into the pre-transplant evaluation may improve understanding and conceptualization of the post-transplantation patient experience and aid in shared decision-making with clinicians.

Patient randomised controlled trial of technology enabled strategies to promote treatment adherence in liver transplantation: rationale and design of the TEST trial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Liver transplantation is a life-saving procedure for end-stage liver disease. However, post-transplant medication regimens are complex and non-adherence is common. Post-transplant medication non-adherence is associated with graft rejection, which can have long-term adverse consequences. Transplant centres are equipped with clinical staff that monitor patients post-transplant; however, digital health tools and proactive immunosuppression adherence monitoring has potential to improve outcomes.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a patient-randomised prospective clinical trial at three transplant centres in the Northeast, Midwest and South to investigate the effects of a remotely administered adherence programme compared with usual care. The programme monitors potential non-adherence largely levering text message prompts and phenotypes the nature of the non-adhere as cognitive, psychological, medical, social or economic. Additional reminders for medications, clinical appointments and routine self-management support are incorporated to promote adherence to the entire medical regimen. The primary study outcome is medication adherence via 24-hour recall; secondary outcomes include additional medication adherence (ASK-12 self-reported scale, regimen knowledge scales, tacrolimus values), quality of life, functional health status and clinical outcomes (eg, days hospitalised). Study implementation, acceptability, feasibility, costs and potential cost-effectiveness will also be evaluated.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The University of Pennsylvania Review Board has approved the study as the single IRB of record (protocol # 849575, V.1.4). Results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and summaries will be provided to study funders.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05260268.

Days alive and out of hospital after liver transplant: comparing a patient-centered outcome between recipients of grafts from donation after circulatory and brain deaths

We retrospectively compared outcomes between recipients of donation after circulatory death (DCD) and donation after brain death (DBD) liver allografts using days alive and out of hospital (DAOH), a composite outcome of mortality, morbidity, and burden of care from patient perspective. The initial length of stay and duration of any subsequent readmission for the first year after liver transplantation were recorded. Donor category and perioperative and intraoperative characteristics pertinent to liver transplantation were included. The primary outcome was DAOH₃₆₅. Secondary outcomes included early allograft dysfunction and hepatic arterial and biliary complications. Although the incidence of both early allograft dysfunction (P < .001) and ischemic cholangiopathy (P < .001) was significantly greater in the recipients of DCD, there were no significant differences in the length of stay and DAOH₃₆₅. The median DAOH₃₆₅ was 355 days for recipients of DBD allografts and 353 days for recipients of DCD allografts (P = .34). Increased transfusion burden, longer cold ischemic time, and non-White recipients were associated with decreased DAOH. There were no significant differences in graft failure (P = .67), retransplantation (P = .67), or 1-year mortality (P = .96) between the 2 groups. DAOH is a practical and attainable measure of outcome after liver transplantation. This metric should be considered for quality measurement and reporting in liver transplantation.

Frailty, mortality, and health care utilization after liver transplantation: From the Multicenter Functional Assessment in Liver Transplantation (FrAILT) Study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Frailty is a well-established risk factor for poor outcomes in patients with cirrhosis awaiting liver transplantation (LT), but whether it predicts outcomes among those who have undergone LT is unknown.

APPROACH AND RESULTS

Adult LT recipients from 8 US centers (2012-2019) were included. Pre-LT frailty was assessed in the ambulatory setting using the Liver Frailty Index (LFI). "Frail" was defined by an optimal cut point of LFI ≥ 4.5. We used the 75th percentile to define "prolonged" post-LT length of stay (LOS; ≥12 days), intensive care unit (ICU) days (≥4 days), and inpatient days within 90 post-LT days (≥17 days). Of 1166 LT recipients, 21% were frail pre-LT. Cumulative incidence of death at 1 and 5 years was 6% and 16% for frail and 4% and 10% for nonfrail patients (overall log-rank p = 0.02). Pre-LT frailty was associated with an unadjusted 62% increased risk of post-LT mortality (95% CI, 1.08-2.44); after adjustment for body mass index, HCC, donor age, and donation after cardiac death status, the HR was 2.13 (95% CI, 1.39-3.26). Patients who were frail versus nonfrail experienced a higher adjusted odds of prolonged LT LOS (OR, 2.00; 95% CI, 1.47-2.73), ICU stay (OR, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.12-2.14), inpatient days within 90 post-LT days (OR, 1.72; 95% CI, 1.25-2.37), and nonhome discharge (OR, 2.50; 95% CI, 1.58-3.97).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with nonfrail patients, frail LT recipients had a higher risk of post-LT death and greater post-LT health care utilization, although overall post-LT survival was acceptable. These data lay the foundation to investigate whether targeting pre-LT frailty will improve post-LT outcomes and reduce resource utilization.

Redefining Success After Liver Transplantation: From Mortality Toward Function and Fulfillment

Liver transplantation (LT), the only cure for end-stage liver disease, is a lifesaving, costly, and limited resource. LT recipients (LTRs) are aging with an increasing burden of medical comorbidities. Patient and graft survival rates exceed 70% at 5 years; however, patient-centered health outcomes beyond survival have received relatively little attention. LTRs must have strong self-management skills to navigate health systems, adhere to clinical monitoring, and take complex, multidrug regimens. All of these tasks require formidable cognitive abilities for active learning and problem solving. Yet, LTRs are at higher risk for impaired cognition as a result of the high prevalence of pretransplant hepatic encephalopathy, multiple chronic conditions, alcohol use, physical frailty, sarcopenia, and older age. Cognitive impairment after transplant may persist and has been causally linked to poor self-management skills, worse physical function, and inferior health outcomes in other health care settings, yet its impact after LT is largely unknown. There is a need to study potentially modifiable, posttransplant targets including caregiver support, physical activity, sleep, and treatment adherence to inform future health system responses to promote the long-term health and well-being of LTRs. Prospective, longitudinal data collection that encompasses key sociodemographic, cognitive-behavioral, psychosocial, and medical factors is needed to improve risk prediction and better inform patient and caregiver expectations. Interventions with proactive monitoring, reducing medical complexity, and improved care coordination can be tailored to optimize posttransplant care. We propose a research agenda focused on understudied, potentially modifiable risk factors to improve the long-term health of LTRs. Our conceptual model accounts for cognitive function, caregiver and patient self-management skills, health behaviors, and patient-centered outcomes beyond mortality. We propose actionable health-system, patient, and caregiver-directed interventions to fill knowledge gaps and improve outcomes.

Biliary Complications Following Adult Deceased Donor Liver Transplantation: Risk Factors and Implications at a High-volume US Center

Biliary leaks and anastomotic strictures comprise the majority of biliary complications (BCs) following liver transplantation (LT). Currently, there are few large contemporary case series of BCs in adult deceased donor liver transplant (DDLT) recipients in the literature. The purpose of this study was to examine the pretransplant and intraoperative risk factors associated with BCs at a high-volume tertiary care center and determine the impact of these BCs on their posttransplant course and long-term transplant outcomes.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed all adult patients undergoing a DDLT from a donor after brain death (DBD) at Emory University between January 2015 and December 2019.

RESULTS

A total of 647 adult patients underwent DDLT from a DBD during the study period and were included in analyses. The median length of follow-up posttransplant was 2.5 y. There were a total of 27 bile leaks (4.2%) and 69 biliary strictures (10.7%). Recipient age and cold ischemic time were identified as risk factors for biliary leak, whereas alcoholic cirrhosis as transplant indication was a risk factor for biliary stricture. Placement of a biliary stent was associated with the development of both biliary leaks and anastomotic strictures. Posttransplant, biliary leaks were a significant risk factor for future episodes of acute rejection but did not impact overall survival. In contrast, biliary strictures were associated with a significantly reduced overall survival at 1- and 4-y post DDLT.

CONCLUSIONS

BCs are a major source of morbidity and mortality following DDLT, with strictures and leaks associated with distinct posttransplant complications.

Development and Validation of a Model to Predict Long-Term Survival After Liver Transplantation

Patients are prioritized for liver transplantation (LT) under an "urgency-based" system using the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score. This system focuses solely on waitlist mortality, without considerations of posttransplant morbidity, mortality, and health care use. We sought to develop and internally validate a continuous posttransplant risk score during 5-year and 10-year time horizons. This retrospective cohort study used national registry data of adult deceased donor LT (DDLT) recipients with ≥90 days of pretransplant waiting time from February 27, 2002 to December 31, 2018. We fit Cox regression models at 5 and 10 years to estimate beta coefficients for a risk score using manual variable selection and calculated the absolute predicted survival time. Among 21,103 adult DDLT recipients, 11 variables were selected for the final model. The area under the curves at 5 and 10 years were 0.63 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.60-0.66) and 0.67 (95% CI, 0.64-0.70), respectively. The group with the highest ("best") scores had 5-year and 10-year survivals of 89.4% and 85.4%, respectively, compared with 45.9% and 22.2% for those with the lowest ("worst") scores. Our score was significantly better at predicting long-term survival compared with the existing scores. We developed and validated a risk score using nearly 17 years of data to prioritize patients with end-stage liver disease based on projected posttransplant survival. This score can serve as the building block by which the transplant field can change the entire approach to prioritizing patients to an approach that is based on considerations of maximizing benefits (ie, survival benefit-based allocation) rather than simply waitlist mortality.

Early Allograft Dysfunction Increases Hospital Associated Costs After Liver Transplantation-A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

Concepts to ameliorate the continued mismatch between demand for liver allografts and supply include the acceptance of allografts that meet extended donor criteria (ECD). ECD grafts are generally associated with an increased rate of complications such as early allograft dysfunction (EAD). The costs of liver transplantation for the health care system with respect to specific risk factors remain unclear and are subject to change. We analyzed 317 liver transplant recipients from 2013 to 2018 for outcome after liver transplantation and hospital costs in a German transplant center. In our study period, 1-year survival after transplantation was 80.1% (95% confidence interval: 75.8%-84.6%) and median hospital stay was 33 days (interquartile rage: 24), with mean hospital costs of €115,924 (SD €113,347). There was a positive correlation between costs and laboratory Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score (r_s = 0.48, P < 0.001), and the development of EAD increased hospital costs by €26,229. ECD grafts were not associated with a higher risk of EAD in our cohort. When adjusting for recipient-associated risk factors such as laboratory Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score, recipient age, and split liver transplantation with propensity score matching, only EAD and cold ischemia increased total costs. Conclusion: Our data show that EAD leads to significantly higher hospital costs for liver transplantation, which are primarily attributed to recipient health status. Strategies to reduce the incidence of EAD are needed to control costs in liver transplantation.

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

Reduction of early hospital readmissions is a declared goal in the United States economic and quality improvement agenda. A retrospective study was performed using the Nationwide Readmissions Database from 2010 to 2014. Our primary aim was to study the rate of early readmissions and its predictors in liver transplant recipients (LTRs). Our secondary aims were to determine the trends of LT, reasons for readmission, costs and predictors of calendar year mortality. Multivariable logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards models were utilized. The 30-day readmission rate was 30.6% among a total of 25,054 LTRs. Trends of LT were observed to be increased in patients > 65 years (11.7-17.8%, p < 0.001) and decreased in 40-64 years (78.0-73.5%, p = 0.001) during study period. The majority of 30-day readmissions were due to post transplant complications, with packed red blood cell transfusions being the most common intervention during readmission. Medicaid or Medicare insurance, surgery at low and medium volume centers, infections, hemodialysis, liver biopsy, and length of stay > 10 days were the predictors of 30-day readmission. Moreover, number of early readmission, age > 64 years, non-alcoholic cirrhosis, and length of stay > 10 days were significant predictor of calendar year mortality in LTRs. Approximately one third of patients require early admission after LT. Early readmission not only increases burden on healthcare, but is also associated with calendar year mortality. Strategies should be implemented to reduce readmission in patients with high risk of readmission identified in our study.

Hospitalization Before Liver Transplantation Predicts Posttransplant Patient Survival: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

In contrast to donor factors predicting outcomes of liver transplantation (LT), few suitable recipient parameters have been identified. To this end, we performed an in-depth analysis of hospitalization status and duration prior to LT as a potential risk factor for posttransplant outcome. The pretransplant hospitalization status of all patients undergoing LT between 2005 and 2016 at the Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin was analyzed retrospectively using propensity score matching. At the time of organ acceptance, 226 of 1134 (19.9%) recipients were hospitalized in an intensive care unit (ICU), 146 (12.9%) in a regular ward (RW) and 762 patients (67.2%) were at home. Hospitalized patients (RW and ICU) compared with patients from home showed a dramatically shorter 3-month survival (78.7% versus 94.4%), 1-year survival (66.3% versus 87.3%), and 3-year survival (61.7% versus 81.7%; all P < 0.001), whereas no significant difference was detected for 3-year survival between ICU and RW patients (61.5% versus 62.3%; P = 0.60). These results remained significant after propensity score matching. Furthermore, in ICU patients, but not in RW patients, survival correlated with days spent in the ICU before LT (1-year survival: 1-6 versus 7-14 days: 73.7% versus 60.5%, P = 0.04; 7-14 days versus >14 days, 60.5% versus 51.0%, P = 0.006). In conclusion, hospitalization status before transplantation is a valuable predictor of patient survival following LT.

Hospitalization Outcomes for Inflammatory Bowel Disease in Teaching vs Nonteaching Hospitals

BACKGROUND

Hospitalizations contribute significantly to the annual health care expenditure for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), and reducing cost of care without compromising outcomes is a rising priority. Teaching hospitals (THs) have higher costs and utilize trainees in care to a greater extent than community hospitals, and it is unknown how hospital teaching status (HTS) affects outcomes. We therefore sought to investigate the impact of HTS on IBD hospitalization outcomes.

METHODS

We used the Vizient clinical database to identify patients hospitalized between October 1, 2014, and March 31, 2018, for IBD. Vizient hospitals were divided into major THs, minor THs, and non-THs. We used multivariable linear regression of aggregated discharge data to assess the association of HTS with mean length of stay (LOS), mean direct cost (DC), 30-day readmission rate (RR), and in-hospital mortality rate (MR), while adjusting for demographics and disease complexity.

RESULTS

Vizient included 29,863 discharges among 291 hospitals for ulcerative colitis (UC) and 62,698 discharges among 314 hospitals for Crohn's disease (CD) between October 1, 2014, and March 31, 2018. Unadjusted mean LOS, mean DC, and 30-day RR were greater among THs for both UC and CD. Unadjusted MR was greater among major THs for UC but not CD. After multivariable analysis, only 30-day RR for UC was increased in major THs relative to non-THs (1.98%; 95% confidence interval, 0.33%-3.61%).

CONCLUSIONS

Differences in metrics of cost-effective hospital care for patients with IBD appear to be driven by disease severity rather than HTS. Future research should attempt to better characterize factors driving resource utilization for IBD hospitalizations.

Intraoperative continuous renal replacement therapy during liver transplantation: a pilot randomized-controlled trial (INCEPTION)

PURPOSE

To evaluate the feasibility of intraoperative continuous renal replacement therapy (IoCRRT) during liver transplantation (LT), in terms of recruitment, protocol adherence, and ascertainment of follow-up.

METHODS

In this pilot randomized open-label controlled trial in adults receiving LT with a Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score ≥ 25 and preoperative acute kidney injury (RIFLE - RISK or higher) and/or estimated glomerular filtration rate < 60 mL·min^-1·1.73 m^-2, patients were randomized to receive IoCRRT or standard of care (SOC). Primary endpoints were feasibility and adverse events. Primary analysis was intention-to-treat (n = 32) and secondary analysis was per-protocol (n = 28).

RESULTS

The trial was stopped early because of slow patient accrual and inadequate funding. Sixty patients were enrolled and 32 (53%) were randomized (n = 15 IoCRRT; n = 17 SOC). Mean (standard deviation) MELD was 36 (8), 81% (n = 26) had cirrhosis; 69% (n = 22) received preoperative RRT; 66% (n = 21) received LT from the intensive care unit. Four patients (n = 2 IoCRRT, n = 2 SOC) did not receive LT post-randomization. Seven patients (41%) allocated to SOC crossed over intraoperatively to IoCRRT. Three patients were lost to follow-up at one year. No adverse events occurred related to IoCRRT. There were no differences in survival at one year (IoCRRT, 71% [n = 10/14] vs SOC, 93% [n = 14/15]; risk ratio, 0.77; 95% confidence interval, 0.54 to 1.1). In the per-protocol analysis (n = 28 received IoCRRT after randomization - n = 20 IoCRRT, n = 8 SOC), one-year survival was 92% and perioperative complications were similar between groups. Only one patient was receiving dialysis one year after LT.

CONCLUSION

In this pilot randomized trial, IoCRRT was feasible and safe with no difference in complications. Crossover rates were high. Despite high preoperative severity of illness, one-year survival was excellent. These data can inform the design of a larger multicentre trial.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

www.clinicalTrials.gov (NCT01575015); registered 12 April, 2012.

Strategies That Reduce 90-Day Readmissions and Inpatient Costs After Liver Transplantation

Liver transplantation (LT) is hospital-resource intensive and associated with high rates of readmission. We have previously shown a reduction in 30-day readmission rates by implementing a specifically designed protocol to increase access to outpatient care. The aim of this work is to determine if the strategies that reduce 30-day readmission after LT were effective in also reducing 90-day readmission rates and costs. A protocol was developed to reduce inpatient readmissions after LT that expanded outpatient services and provided alternatives to readmission. The 90-day readmission rates and costs were compared before and after implementing strategies outlined in the protocol. Multivariable analysis was used to control for potential confounding factors. Over the study period, 304 adult primary LTs were performed on patients with a median biological Model for End-Stage Liver Disease of 22. There were 112 (37%) patients who were readmitted within 90 days of transplant. The readmission rates before and after implementation of the protocol were 53% and 26%, respectively (P < 0.001). The most common reason for readmission was elevated liver tests/rejection (24%). In multivariable analysis, the protocol remained associated with avoiding readmission (odds ratio, 0.33; 95% confidence interval, 0.20-0.55; P < 0.001). The median length of stay after transplant before and after protocol implementation was 8 days and 7 days, respectively. A greater proportion of patients were discharged to hospital lodging after protocol implementation (10% versus 19%; P = 0.03). The 90-day readmission costs were reduced by 55%, but the total 90-day costs were reduced by only 2.7% because of higher outpatient costs and index admission costs. In conclusion, 90-day readmission rates and readmission costs can be reduced by improving access to outpatient services and hospital-local lodging. Total 90-day costs were similar between the 2 groups because of higher outpatient costs after the protocol was introduced.

Hepatology in a changing health care landscape: A call for health services research

With the passage of the Affordable Care Act followed by the physician payment reform, there is an urgent need to better understand the complex relationships between structure (including incentives), processes, and outcomes of health care and, based on this understanding, identify interventions that can ensure delivery of high-value care to patients with liver disease. As hepatologists, how do we systematically address these issues and ensure that we provide high-value care to our patients? These factors combine in the burgeoning field of health services research. This article seeks to describe how health services research influences the practice of hepatology, the tools and technologies it utilizes, as well as how interested individuals can seek to acquire knowledge and methodological training in health services research. Finally, we summarize the current state of health services research in hepatology and liver transplantation. (Hepatology 2018).

Noteworthy Literature published in 2017 for Abdominal Organ Transplantation

In 2017, we identified more than 400 peer reviewed publications on the topic of pancreas transplantation, more than 500 on intestinal transplantation, more than 4000 on renal transplantation, and more than 4700 on liver transplantation. This annual review highlights the most pertinent literature for anesthesiologists and critical care physicians caring for patients undergoing abdominal organ transplantation. We explore a wide range of topics, including risk for and prediction of perioperative complications, recommendations on perioperative management, economic analyses, and education of the trainees in abdominal transplantation anesthesia and critical care.