Risk of window period hepatitis-C infection in high infectious risk donors: systematic review and meta-analysis

Increased-risk versus standard-risk donation in lung transplantation: A United Network of Organ Sharing analysis

OBJECTIVES

Donors with characteristics that increase risk of hepatitis B virus, hepatitis C virus, and HIV transmission are deemed increased-risk donors (IRDs) per Public Health Service guidelines. Compared with organs from standard-risk donors (SRDs), IRD organs are more frequently declined. We sought to investigate the outcomes of IRD lung transplant recipients following the 2013 guideline change.

METHODS

We retrospectively identified lung transplant recipients using the United Network of Organ Sharing registry (February 2014 to March 2020). Patients were divided into 2 cohorts, based on Centers for Disease Control and Prevention risk status of the donor: SRD or IRD. Demographics and clinical parameters were compared across groups. Survival was compared using Kaplan-Meier curves and log-rank tests. Cox proportional hazard model was performed to identify variables associated with survival outcome.

RESULTS

We identified 13,205 lung transplant recipients, 9963 who received allografts from SRDs and 3242 who received allografts from IRDs. In both groups, most donors were White, male, and <30 years old. IRDs demonstrated greater rates of heavy alcohol, cigarette, and cocaine use. SRDs had greater rates of cancer, hypertension, previous myocardial infarction, and diabetes. Survival analysis demonstrated no significant difference in 90-day, 1-year, 3-year, or 5-year survival outcome between SRD and IRD recipients (P = .34, P = .67, P = .40, P = .52, respectively). Cox regression demonstrated that double-lung transplants were associated with 13% decreased mortality risk compared with single-lung (P = .0009).

CONCLUSIONS

IRD and SRD recipients demonstrated equivalent survival outcomes. Our study suggests that IRDs offer a safe approach to expand the donor pool and increase availability of lungs for transplantation.

To decline or not to decline: Consequences of decision-making regarding lung offers from donors with hepatitis C

OBJECTIVE

Lung transplants from donors with hepatitis C (HCV D+) have excellent outcomes, but these organs continue to be declined. We evaluated whether (1) being listed to consider and (2) accepting versus declining HCV D+ offers provided a survival benefit to lung transplant candidates.

METHODS

Using the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients, we identified all adult (≥18 years) lung transplant candidates 2016-2021 and compared waitlist mortality between those willing versus not willing to consider HCV D+ offers using competing risk regression. We identified all candidates offered an HCV D+ lung that was later accepted and followed them from offer decision until death or end-of-study. We estimated adjusted mortality risk of accepting versus declining an HCV D+ lung offer using propensity-weighted Cox regression.

RESULTS

From 2016 to 2021, we identified 21,007 lung transplant candidates, 33.8% of whom were willing to consider HCV D+ offers. Candidates willing to consider HCV D+ offers had a 17% lower risk of waitlist mortality (subhazard ratio, 0.83; 95% confidence interval, 0.75-0.91, P < .001). Over the same period, 665 HCV D+ lung offers were accepted after being declined a total of 2562 times. HCV D+ offer acceptance versus decline was associated with a 20% lower risk of mortality (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.80; 95% confidence interval, 0.66-0.96, P = .02).

CONCLUSIONS

Considering HCV D+ lung offers was associated with a 17% lower risk of waitlist mortality, whereas accepting versus declining an HCV D+ lung offer was associated with a 20% lower risk of mortality. Centers and candidates should consider accepting suitable HCV D+ lung offers to optimize outcomes.

Inequities in organ and tissue donation and transplantation for sexual orientation and gender identity diverse people: A scoping review

Sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) diverse populations experience discrimination in organ and tissue donation and transplantation (OTDT) systems globally. We assembled a multidisciplinary group of clinical experts as well as SOGI-diverse patient and public partners and conducted a scoping review including citations on the experiences of SOGI-diverse persons in OTDT systems globally to identify and explore the inequities that exist with regards to living and deceased OTDT. Using scoping review methods, we conducted a systematic literature search of relevant electronic databases from 1970-2021 including a grey literature search. We identified and screened 2402 references and included 87 unique publications. Two researchers independently coded data in included publications in duplicate. We conducted a best-fit framework synthesis paired with an inductive thematic analysis to identify synthesized benefits, harms, inequities, justification of inequities, recommendations to mitigate inequities, laws and regulations, as well as knowledge and implementation gaps regarding SOGI-diverse identities in OTDT systems. We identified numerous harms and inequities for SOGI-diverse populations in OTDT systems. There were no published benefits of SOGI-diverse identities in OTDT systems. We summarized recommendations for the promotion of equity for SOGI-diverse populations and identified gaps that can serve as targets for action moving forward.

Outcome of Kidney Transplants from Viremic and Non-Viremic Hepatitis C Virus Positive Donors into Negative Recipients: Results of the Spanish Registry

Historically, donor infection with hepatitis-C virus (HCV) has been a barrier to kidney transplantation. However, in recent years, it has been reported that HCV positive kidney donors transplanted into HCV negative recipients offer acceptable mid-term results. However, acceptance of HCV donors, especially viremic, has not broadened in the clinical practice. This is an observational, multicenter, retrospective study including kidney transplants from HCV positive donors into negative recipients reported to the Spanish group from 2013 to 2021. Recipients from viremic donors received peri-transplant treatment with direct antiviral agents (DAA) for 8-12 weeks. We included 75 recipients from 44 HCV non-viremic donors and 41 from 25 HCV viremic donors. Primary non function, delayed graft function, acute rejection rate, renal function at the end of follow up, and patient and graft survival were not different between groups. Viral replication was not detected in recipients from non-viremic donors. Recipient treatment with DAA started pre-transplant avoids (n = 21) or attenuates (n = 5) viral replication but leads to non-different outcomes to post-transplant treatment with DAA (n = 15). HCV seroconversion was more frequent in recipients from viremic donors (73% vs. 16%, p < 0.001). One recipient of a viremic donor died due to hepatocellular carcinoma at 38 months. Donor HCV viremia seems not to be a risk factor for kidney transplant recipients receiving peri-transplant DAA, but continuous surveillance should be advised.

Recently Acquired Blood-borne Virus Infections in Australian Deceased Organ Donors: Estimation of the Residual Risk of Unexpected Transmission

Unexpected donor-derived infections of hepatitis B virus (HBV), hepatitis C virus (HCV), and HIV are rare but important potential complications of deceased organ transplantation. The prevalence of recently acquired (yield) infections has not been previously described in a national cohort of Australian deceased organ donors. Donor yield infections are of particularly significance, as they can be used to gain insights in the incidence of disease in the donor pool and in turn, estimate the risk of unexpected disease transmission to recipients.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective review of all patients who commenced workup for donation in Australia between 2014 and 2020. Yield cases were defined by having both unreactive serological screening for current or previous infection and reactive nucleic acid testing screening on initial and repeat testing. Incidence was calculated using a yield window estimate and residual risk using the incidence/window period model.

Results

The review identified only a single yield infection of HBV in 3724 persons who commenced donation workup. There were no yield cases of HIV or HCV. There were no yield infections in donors with increased viral risk behaviors. The prevalence of HBV, HCV, and HIV was 0.06% (0.01-0.22), 0.00% (0-0.11), and 0.00% (0-0.11), respectively. The residual risk of HBV was estimated to be 0.021% (0.001-0.119).

Conclusions

The prevalence of recently acquired HBV, HCV, and HIV in Australians who commence workup for deceased donation is low. This novel application of yield-case-methodology has produced estimates of unexpected disease transmission which are modest, particularly when contrasted with local average waitlist mortality. Supplemental Visual Abstract; http://links.lww.com/TXD/A503.

Donor heart selection: Evidence-based guidelines for providers

The proposed donor heart selection guidelines provide evidence-based and expert-consensus recommendations for the selection of donor hearts following brain death. These recommendations were compiled by an international panel of experts based on an extensive literature review.

Review of heart transplantation from hepatitis C-positive donors

Significant scarcity of a donor pool exists for heart transplantation (HT) as the prevalence of patients with end-stage refractory heart failure is increasing exceptionally. With the discovery of effective direct-acting antiviral and favorable short-term outcomes following HT, the hearts from hepatitis C virus (HCV) patient are being utilized to increase the donor pool. Short-term outcomes with regards to graft function, coronary artery vasculopathy, and kidney and liver disease is comparable in HCV-negative recipients undergoing HT from HCV-positive donors compared to HCV-negative donors. A significant high incidence of donor-derived HCV transmission was observed with great success of achieving sustained viral response with the use of direct-acting antivirals. By accepting HCV-positive organs, the donor pool has expanded with younger donors, a shorter waitlist time, and a reduction in waitlist mortality. However, the long-term outcomes and impact of specific HCV genotypes remains to be seen. We reviewed the current literature on HT from HCV-positive donors.

Deceased Donor Characteristics and Kidney Transplant Outcomes

Kidney transplantation is the therapy of choice for people living with kidney failure who are suitable for surgery. However, the disparity between supply versus demand for organs means many either die or are removed from the waiting-list before receiving a kidney allograft. Reducing unnecessary discard of deceased donor kidneys is important to maximize utilization of a scarce and valuable resource but requires nuanced decision-making. Accepting kidneys from deceased donors with heterogenous characteristics for waitlisted kidney transplant candidates, often in the context of time-pressured decision-making, requires an understanding of the association between donor characteristics and kidney transplant outcomes. Deceased donor clinical factors can impact patient and/or kidney allograft survival but risk-versus-benefit deliberation must be balanced against the morbidity and mortality associated with remaining on the waiting-list. In this article, the association between deceased kidney donor characteristics and post kidney transplant outcomes for the recipient are reviewed. While translating this evidence to individual kidney transplant candidates is a challenge, emerging strategies to improve this process will be discussed. Fundamentally, tools and guidelines to inform decision-making when considering deceased donor kidney offers will be valuable to both professionals and patients.

Pretransplant Patient Education in Solid-organ Transplant: A Narrative Review

Education for pretransplant, solid-organ recipient candidates aims to improve knowledge and understanding about the transplant process, outcomes, and potential complications to support informed, shared decision-making to reduce fears and anxieties about transplant, inform expectations, and facilitate adjustment to posttransplant life. In this review, we summarize novel pretransplant initiatives and approaches to educate solid-organ transplant recipient candidates. First, we review approaches that may be common to all solid-organ transplants, then we summarize interventions specific to kidney, liver, lung, and heart transplant. We describe evidence that emphasizes the need for multidisciplinary approaches to transplant education. We also summarize initiatives that consider online (eHealth) and mobile (mHealth) solutions. Finally, we highlight education initiatives that support racialized or otherwise marginalized communities to improve equitable access to solid-organ transplant. A considerable amount of work has been done in solid-organ transplant since the early 2000s with promising results. However, many studies on education for pretransplant recipient candidates involve relatively small samples and nonrandomized designs and focus on short-term surrogate outcomes. Overall, many of these studies have a high risk of bias. Frequently, interventions assessed are not well characterized or they are combined with administrative and data-driven initiatives into multifaceted interventions, which makes it difficult to assess the impact of the education component on outcomes. In the future, well-designed studies rigorously assessing well-defined surrogate and clinical outcomes will be needed to evaluate the impact of many promising initiatives.

Consent to organ offers from public health service “Increased Risk” donors decreases time to transplant and waitlist mortality

Background

The Public Health Service Increased Risk designation identified organ donors at increased risk of transmitting hepatitis B, hepatitis C, and human immunodeficiency virus. Despite clear data demonstrating a low absolute risk of disease transmission from these donors, patients are hesitant to consent to receiving organs from these donors. We hypothesize that patients who consent to receiving offers from these donors have decreased time to transplant and decreased waitlist mortality.

Methods

We performed a single-center retrospective review of all-comers waitlisted for liver transplant from 2013 to 2019. The three competing risk events (transplant, death, and removal from transplant list) were analyzed. 1603 patients were included, of which 1244 (77.6%) consented to offers from increased risk donors.

Results

Compared to those who did not consent, those who did had 2.3 times the rate of transplant (SHR 2.29, 95% CI 1.88–2.79, p < 0.0001), with a median time to transplant of 11 months versus 14 months (p < 0.0001), as well as a 44% decrease in the rate of death on the waitlist (SHR 0.56, 95% CI 0.42–0.74, p < 0.0001). All findings remained significant after controlling for the recipient age, race, gender, blood type, and MELD. Of those who did not consent, 63/359 (17.5%) received a transplant, all of which were from standard criteria donors, and of those who did consent, 615/1244 (49.4%) received a transplant, of which 183/615 (29.8%) were from increased risk donors.

Conclusions

The findings of decreased rates of transplantation and increased risk of death on the waiting list by patients who were unwilling to accept risks of viral transmission of 1/300–1/1000 in the worst case scenarios suggests that this consent process may be harmful especially when involving “trigger” words such as HIV. The rigor of the consent process for the use of these organs was recently changed but a broader discussion about informed consent in similar situations is important.

Protocol for Optimizing the Use of Kidneys From Donors With Seropositivity for Hepatitis C Virus in Seronegative Recipients

BACKGROUND

The rapid identification of the viral load from hepatitis C virus (HCV) in seropositive donors enables the determination of their infection capacity and the subsequent design of a strategy to optimize the use of direct-action antivirals (DAA) in seronegative recipients. In 2017, we designed an optimization protocol; this study aims to assess its efficacy and safety.

METHODS

This is a prospective, multicenter observational study that complies with the Declarations of Helsinki and Istanbul. Donors were HCV seropositive. The HCV and human immunodeficiency virus loads were immediately determined in the donors. For viremic donors, recipients were treated with DAA for 8 weeks. For nonviremic donors, DAA was started if a viral load was detected during the follow-up period. The minimum follow-up period was 6 months posttransplant.

RESULTS

This study recruited 28 donors. Just over half of the donors (n = 15; 53.5%) had a nonactive history of injection drug use. Eight (22.4%) donors were viremic, and 20 (87.6%) were nonviremic; 13 (65%) had been treated previously. Nine grafts were ineligible for the protocol. We performed a total of 47 transplants. Procedure I (viremic donors) was performed in 13 recipients (27.7%). Posttransplant viremia was observed in 6 participants. Posttransplant viremia was low (<100 IU/mL) in 4 participants but high (36,000 and 138,000 IU/mL) in 2 participants who had initiated DAA after the transplant; all these patients had a sustained viral response. Seroconversion was observed in 11 of 13 (84.6%) patients. Procedure II (nonviremic donors) was undertaken in 34 (82.3%) patients. No positive viral loads were observed. Seroconversion occurred in 7 of 34 (20.5%) recipients. All recipients maintained kidney function at 6 months posttransplant, except 1 patient with a graft that had never been functional and another patient who died of pancreatitis. Both patients had received kidneys from nonviremic donors.

CONCLUSIONS

Our experience supports the efficacy and safety of this protocol.

The Surge in Deceased Liver Donors Due to the Opioid Epidemic: Is It Time to Split the Difference?

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to compare trends in use of drug overdose (DO) donors in adult versus pediatric liver transplants and the utilization of split liver transplantation in this donor population.

METHODS

The United Network for Organ Sharing database was reviewed for deceased donor liver transplants from March 2002 to December 2017. Recipients were categorized by donor mechanism of death. Donor splitting criteria was defined as age <40 y, single vasopressor or less, transaminases no >3 times the normal limit, and body mass index ≤ 28 kg/m2.

RESULTS

Adult liver transplants from DO donors increased from 2% in 2002 to 15% in 2017, while pediatric liver transplants from DO donors only increased from <1% to 3% in the same time. While 28% of DO donors met splitting criteria, only 3% of those meeting splitting criteria were used as a split graft. Both pediatric and adult recipients of DO donor livers achieved excellent patient and graft survival.

CONCLUSIONS

DO donors are underutilized in pediatric liver transplantation. Increased splitting of DO donor livers could significantly decrease, if not eliminate, the pediatric liver waiting list.

Potential Unintended Consequences of National Infectious Disease Screening Strategies in Deceased Donor Kidney Transplantation: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

BACKGROUND

In order to counter the lack of sufficient kidney donors, there has been interest in expanding the utilization of organs from increased infectious-risk donors. Negative nucleic acid testing of increased infectious-risk organs has been shown to increase their use as compared to only enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay negativity. However, it is not known how the expanded use of nucleic acid testing on a national scale might affect total donor utilization.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this paper was to determine if a national screening policy requiring the use of nucleic acid testing in both increased infectious-risk and non-increased infectious-risk renal transplant donors would increase the donor organ pool.

METHODS

This study used decision-tree analysis to determine the cost-effectiveness of four US national screening policies based on an increasingly expansive use of nucleic acid testing for increased infectious-risk and non-increased infectious-risk kidneys. Parameters were taken from the literature. All costs were reported in 2020 US dollars using a Medicare payer perspective and a life-time horizon.

RESULTS

The use of nucleic acid screening solely for increased infectious-risk organs was the dominant strategy. Our results were robust to deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. One of the main driving factors of cost-effectiveness was the false-positive rate of nucleic acid testing.

CONCLUSION

Before implementing nucleic acid screening outside of increased infectious-risk organs, its false-positivity rate should be directly studied to ensure that its use does not detrimentally affect transplantation numbers, quality-adjusted life-years, and costs.

Correlation between serology and nucleic acid amplification test in blood donors who are reactive for hepatitis B virus, hepatitis C and human immunodeficiency virus and evaluation of the epidemiological profile of infected people in blood centers in the State of Paraná

Objectives

To compare the results of conventional serological tests and molecular technology (NAT, Nucleic Acid Amplification Test), identify donors in the diagnostic window period, and determine the prevalence of hepatitis B virus (HBV), hepatitis C virus (HCV), and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) among the samples of blood donors blocked by serological screening.

Methods

A retrospective cross-sectional study was carried out by analyzing blood donor information contained in the database of 20 blood centers in Paraná, from January 2018 to December 2019.

Results

A total of 1,496 blood bags were reactive for HBV, HCV, or HIV in serological and/or NAT tests. The 20th Regional Health (RH) Unit had the greatest number of unfit individuals with altered screening for the three infections, with a prevalence of 0.70%. The lowest number of blocked blood donors occurred in the 15th RH, with a prevalence of 0.08%. The highest prevalence of HBV occurred in the 8th RH, with a reagent serology of 0.34% and a positive NAT of 0.17%. For HCV, the prevalence for reagent serology was 0.28%, while that for NAT was 0.02%, which occurred in the 20th RH. For HIV and for NAT, the prevalence of blood donors with positive serology occurred in the 20th RH, at 0.25% and 0.04%, retrospectively. The 13th RH had the highest prevalence of HIV in relation to NAT, that is, conventional serology in concomitance with NAT technology, at 0.07%. During the 2-year period, only 1 reactive donor in the 9th was found for NAT (HBV), in a diagnostic window.

Conclusion

In Paraná’s blood centers, the inability to donate due to HBV, HCV, and HIV, occurred mainly in initial donors, men, those with >8 years of education, aged 16–45 years, married, and O positive. The most affected regions were located in the west and northwest of Paraná. Most of the results showed a discrepancy between the methodologies used.

Brief Report: Willingness to Accept HIV-Infected and Increased Infectious Risk Donor Organs Among Transplant Candidates Living With HIV

BACKGROUND

HIV-infected (HIV+) donor to HIV+ recipient (HIV D+/R+) transplantation might improve access to transplantation for people living with HIV. However, it remains unknown whether transplant candidates living with HIV will accept the currently unknown risks of HIV D+/R+ transplantation.

METHODS

We surveyed transplant candidates living with HIV from 9 US transplant centers regarding willingness to accept HIV+ donor organs.

RESULTS

Among 116 participants, the median age was 55 years, 68% were men, and 78% were African American. Most were willing to accept HIV+ living donor organs (87%), HIV+ deceased donor organs (84%), and increased infectious risk donor organs (70%). Some (30%) were concerned about HIV superinfection; even among these respondents, 71% were willing to accept an HIV D+ organ. Respondents from centers that had already performed a transplant under an HIV D+/R+ transplantation research protocol were more willing to accept HIV+ deceased donor organs (89% vs. 71%, P = 0.04). Respondents who chose not to enroll in an HIV D+/R+ transplantation research protocol were less likely to believe that HIV D+/R+ transplantation was safe (45% vs. 77%, P = 0.02), and that HIV D+ organs would work similar to HIV D- organs (55% vs. 77%, P = 0.04), but more likely to believe they would receive an infection other than HIV from an HIV D+ organ (64% vs. 13%, P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Willingness to accept HIV D+ organs among transplant candidates living with HIV does not seem to be a major barrier to HIV D+/R+ transplantation and may increase with growing HIV D+/R+ transplantation experience.

Ten years of donor-derived disease: A report of the disease transmission advisory committee

Despite clinical and laboratory screening of potential donors for transmissible disease, unexpected transmission of disease from donor to recipient remains an inherent risk of organ transplantation. The Disease Transmission Advisory Committee (DTAC) was created to review and classify reports of potential disease transmission and use this information to inform national policy and improve patient safety. From January 1, 2008 to December 31, 2017, the DTAC received 2185 reports; 335 (15%) were classified as a proven/probable donor transmission event. Infections were transmitted most commonly (67%), followed by malignancies (29%), and other disease processes (6%). Forty-six percent of recipients receiving organs from a donor that transmitted disease to at least 1 recipient developed a donor-derived disease (DDD). Sixty-seven percent of recipients developed symptoms of DDD within 30 days of transplantation, and all bacterial infections were recognized within 45 days. Graft loss or death occurred in about one third of recipients with DDD, with higher rates associated with malignancy transmission and parasitic and fungal diseases. Unexpected DDD was rare, occurring in 0.18% of all transplant recipients. These findings will help focus future efforts to recognize and prevent DDD.

Paradigm Shift in Utilization of Livers from Hepatitis C-Viremic Donors into Hepatitis C Virus-Negative Patients

Despite record-breaking numbers of liver transplants (LTs) performed in the United States in each of the last 7 years, many patients remain on the wait list as the demand for LT continues to exceed the supply of available donors. The emergence of highly effective and well-tolerated direct-acting antiviral therapy has transformed the clinical course and management of hepatitis C virus (HCV) in both the pretransplant and posttransplant setting. Historically, donor livers infected with HCV were either transplanted into patients already infected with HCV or discarded.

Donor management using a specialized donor care facility is associated with higher organ utilization from drug overdose donors

Drug overdoses have tripled in the United States over the last two decades. With the increasing demand for donor organs, one potential consequence of the opioid epidemic may be an increase in suitable donor organs. Unfortunately, organs from donors dying of drug overdose have poorer utilization rates than other groups of brain-dead donors, largely due to physician and recipient concerns about viral disease transmission. During the study period of 2011 to 2016, drug overdose donors (DODs) account for an increasingly greater proportion of the national donor pool. We show that a novel model of donor care, known as specialized donor care facility (SDCF), is associated with an increase in organ utilization from DODs compared to the conventional model of hospital-based donor care. This is likely related to the close relationship of the SDCF with the transplant centers, leading to improved communication and highly efficient donor care.

Increased-risk donors and solid organ transplantation: current practices and opportunities for improvement

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The development and implementation of 'increased risk donor' (IRD) status by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) was intended to guide patients and providers in decision making regarding risk of infectious transmission via solid organ transplantation. Several contemporary studies have shown underutilization of these organs. This review summarizes the issues surrounding IRD status as well as recent advances in our understanding of the risks and benefits of increased risk organs and their appropriate utilization.

RECENT FINDINGS

Risk of window-period infection remains exceedingly low, and implementation of nucleic acid testing for HIV and hepatitis C virus (HCV) has resulted in decreasing risk of window-period infection often by an order of magnitude or more. Surgeons remain hesitant to utilize IRD organs. In addition, surgeon assessment of risk by donor behaviour was often discordant with known risks of those behaviours. Studies investigating outcomes of utilization of IRD organs suggest long-term mortality and graft survival is at least equivalent to non-IRD organs. Contemporary results suggest that IRD organs continue to be underutilized, particularly adult kidneys and lungs, with hundreds of wasted organs per year.

SUMMARY

CDC IRD labelling has led to an underutilization of organs for transplantation. The risks associated with acceptance of an IRD organ are inflated by surgeons and patients, and outcomes for patients who undergo transplantation with increased risk organs are similar to or better than those for patients whom accept standard risk organs. The rate of transmission of window-period infection from IRD organs is exceptionally low. The harms regarding the utility of Public Health Service increased risk classification outweigh the benefits for patients in need of transplant.

Introduction to the Best-Case/Worst-Case Framework Within Transplantation Surgery to Improve Decision-Making for Increased Risk Donor Organ Offers

Public Health Service increased risk donor kidneys are discarded 50% more often than nonincreased risk donor kidneys despite equivalent patient and graft survival outcomes. Patient and provider biases as well as challenges in risk interpretation contribute to the underuse of increased risk donor organs. As the ultimate decision to accept or reject an increased risk donor organ results from the patient-provider conversation, there is an opportunity to improve this dialogue. This report introduces the best-case/worst-case communication guide for structuring high-stake conversations on increased risk kidney offers between transplant providers and their patients. Through best case/worst case, providers focus on eliciting patient values and long-term goals. The patient's unique context can then inform an individualized discussion of "best," "worst," and "most likely" outcomes and support the provider's ultimate recommendation. Transplant providers are encouraged to adopt this communication strategy to enhance shared decision-making and improve patient outcomes.

Use of HCV-Positive Livers in HCV-Negative Recipients

INTRODUCTION

There are only limited data on the survival outcomes after transplanting HCV RNA-positive liver into HCV RNA-negative recipients. The objective of our study was to determine whether there were graft and patient survival differences when HCV-negative patients received HCV RNA (nucleic acid amplification testing [NAT] positive)-positive liver grafts.

METHODS

We queried the United Network for Organ Sharing data sets from January 2014 to December 2018, and recipients (N = 24,724) were stratified into 6 groups based on the status of HCV antibody and RNA of recipients and donors. The Cox proportional hazard regression was used to estimate the relationship between groups and 1-year post-LT graft or patient survival.

RESULTS

During the study period, 1,358 recipients received NAT-positive liver grafts. Two hundred ten of the recipients were HCV negative. During the same period, 707 HCV antibody-positive but NAT-negative grafts were transplanted into 516 HCV-positive and 191 HCV-negative recipients. There were no differences in survival in HCV-positive recipients whether they received NAT-positive grafts (n = 1,148) or HCV antibody-negative/NAT-negative grafts (n = 6,321). Recipients of grafts from HCV antibody-positive/NAT-negative donors had similar survival whether recipients were HCV-negative patients (n = 191) or HCV-positive patients (n = 516), and their survival probabilities were similar to those of HCV-negative recipients (n = 6,321) receiving grafts from HCV antibody-negative/NAT-negative donors. Patient survival was lower (P = 0.049) when HCV-negative recipients (n = 210) received NAT-positive grafts compared with HCV-positive patients (n = 1,148) receiving NAT-positive grafts; however, when adjusted for recipient and donor characteristics, the difference was not significant.

DISCUSSION

HCV-negative recipients receiving HCV-positive liver grafts (NAT positive) have excellent 1-year survival outcomes.

The impact of public health service increased risk donors in pediatric liver transplantation

Many transplant programs are reluctant to use organs from deceased donors designated as "PHS increased risk" due to misconceptions regarding the quality of those organs. This study evaluated the impact of PHS increased risk donors on patient and allograft survival in pediatric patients undergoing liver transplantation. Retrospective analysis of the UNOS database from January 2005 through September 2017 revealed 5615 pediatric patients who underwent isolated liver transplantation; of these, 5057 patients received primary isolated liver transplants and 558 patients received isolated liver retransplants. PHS increased risk organs were used in 6.7% and 5.4% of the children receiving primary isolated and retransplant livers, respectively. Cox proportional hazards models adjusted for donor and recipient characteristics determined the relative risk of PHS status on allograft and patient survival. Sicker children (those in ICU [P < .001] and on life support [P = .04]) were more likely to receive PHS increased risk donor organs. There were no differences in overall patient (P = .61) or allograft (P = .68) survival between pediatric patients receiving PHS positive vs PHS negative deceased donor organs; adjusted models also demonstrated no statistically significant differences in patient or allograft survival. Excellent patient and allograft survival can be accomplished with PHS increased risk organs.

Usage of HCV viremic organs in liver transplantation to anti-HCV negative recipients: The current status and review of literature

Liver transplantation is the main curative therapy for end-stage liver disease. The number of transplanted organs is increasing globally. However, the number of available organs in the pool is insufficient, considering the excessive number of patients on the waiting list, which is a major concern for transplant programs. Hepatitis C infection (HCV) is a common indication for liver transplantation, and in recent years, a major progress has been made in its treatment with direct-acting antiviral (DAA) agents. HCV-positive livers have been transplanted to HCV-positive recipients for a long time. The high rate of sustained virologic response through DAA has brought new treatment options for the patients during the pre- and post-transplantation periods. Recently, there have been few reports of transplanting the available HCV-positive organs to HCV noninfected recipients. However, there is not yet an agreement on the optimal selection of patients who would benefit from such transplantation, and this has become a current topic of interest. Thus, we aim to review the current literature on this evolving topic.

Utilization of hepatitis C virus-infected organ donors in cardiothoracic transplantation: An ISHLT expert consensus statement

The advent of therapies for successful treatment of hepatitis C virus has allowed the heart and lung transplant community to re-explore the use of hepatitis C virus-positive donors for organ transplantation, with a benefit for many terminally ill patients. The consensus statements provided herein represent the current state of knowledge and expertise in this area, which we expect will continue to rapidly evolve over the next few years.

Outcomes After Declining Increased Infectious Risk Kidney Offers for Pediatric Candidates in the United States

BACKGROUND

Kidneys from infectious risk donors (IRD) confer substantial survival benefit in adults, yet the benefit of IRD kidneys to pediatric candidates remains unclear in the context of high waitlist prioritization.

METHODS

Using 2010-2016 Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients data, we studied 2417 pediatric candidates (age <18 y) who were offered an IRD kidney that was eventually used for transplantation. We followed candidates from the date of first IRD kidney offer until the date of death or censorship and used Cox regression to estimate mortality risk associated with IRD kidney acceptance versus decline, adjusting for age, sex, race, diagnosis, and dialysis time.

RESULTS

Over the study period, 2250 (93.1%) pediatric candidates declined and 286 (11.8%) accepted an IRD kidney offer; 119 (41.6%) of the 286 had previously declined a different IRD kidney. Cumulative survival among those who accepted versus declined the IRD kidney was 99.6% versus 99.4% and 96.3% versus 97.8% 1 and 6 years post decision, respectively (P = 0.1). Unlike the substantial survival benefit seen in adults (hazard ratio = 0.52), among pediatric candidates, we did not detect a survival benefit associated with accepting an IRD kidney (adjusted hazard ratio: 0.791.723.73, P = 0.2). However, those who declined IRD kidneys waited a median 9.6 months for a non-IRD kidney transplant (11.2 mo among those <6 y, 8.8 mo among those on dialysis). Kidney donor profile index (KDPI) of the eventually accepted non-IRD kidneys (median = 13, interquartile range = 6-23) was similar to KDPI of the declined IRD kidneys (median = 16, interquartile range = 9-28).

CONCLUSIONS

Unlike in adults, IRD kidneys conferred no survival benefit to pediatric candidates, although they did reduce waiting times. The decision to accept IRD kidneys should balance the advantage of faster transplantation against the risk of infectious transmission.

The impact of change in definition of increased-risk donors on survival after lung transplant

OBJECTIVES

To study the impact of using the US Public Health Service broadened definition of "increased-risk" donors (2013) in comparison with "high-risk" (1994) and standard infectious risk donors on lung transplant recipient outcomes.

METHODS

Patients who underwent lung transplant between January 1, 2006, and May 31, 2017, in the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients were divided into 2 cohorts, recipients of: (1) high-risk donors: January 1, 2006, to October 1, 2013, and (2) increased-risk donors: January 1, 2014, to May 31, 2017, and compared with matched recipients who received standard-risk donors. Risks for acute rejection, patient, and graft survival using propensity score matched cohorts, multivariable logistic, and Cox models were examined.

RESULTS

In total, 18,490 lung transplant recipients were analyzed with 36% transplanted during the increased-risk donor definition period. The proportion of donors classified as nonstandard infectious risk increased with the definition change (8% high-risk donors vs 22% increased-risk donors; P < .001). In both cohorts, male patients with a lower forced expiratory volume in 1 second and greater creatinine were more likely to receive an organ from increased risk donors. Neither graft nor patient survival differed by donor type in either period. Acute treated rejection within 1 year did not differ by period for recipients of increased risk donors (odds ratio, 0.87; P = .23) or recipients of high-risk donors (odds ratio, 1.2; P = .27).

CONCLUSIONS

The 2013 broadened definition of donor risk increased the proportion of nonstandard infectious risk donors. Recipients of increased/high-risk donors had similar graft and patient survival compared with standard-risk donors.

National Variation in Increased Infectious Risk Kidney Offer Acceptance

BACKGROUND

Despite providing survival benefit, increased risk for infectious disease (IRD) kidney offers are declined at 1.5 times the rate of non-IRD kidneys. Elucidating sources of variation in IRD kidney offer acceptance may highlight opportunities to expand use of these life-saving organs.

METHODS

To explore center-level variation in offer acceptance, we studied 6765 transplanted IRD kidneys offered to 187 transplant centers between 2009 and 2017 using Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients data. We used multilevel logistic regression to determine characteristics associated with offer acceptance and to calculate the median odds ratio (MOR) of acceptance (higher MOR indicates greater heterogeneity).

RESULTS

Higher quality kidneys (per 10 units kidney donor profile index; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.94; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.92-0.95), higher yearly volume (per 10 deceased donor kidney transplants; aOR, 1.08, 95% CI, 1.06-1.10), smaller waitlist size (per 100 candidates; aOR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.95-0.98), and fewer transplant centers in the donor service area (per center; aOR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.85-0.91) were associated with greater odds of IRD acceptance. Adjusting for donor and center characteristics, we found wide heterogeneity in IRD offer acceptance (MOR, 1.96). In other words, if listed at a center with more aggressive acceptance practices, a candidate could be 2 times more likely to have an IRD kidney offer accepted.

CONCLUSIONS

Wide national variation in IRD kidney offer acceptance limits access to life-saving kidneys for many transplant candidates.

Residual risk of infection with blood-borne viruses in potential organ donors at increased risk of infection: systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the prevalence and incidence of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), hepatitis C virus (HCV), and hepatitis B virus (HBV) among people at increased risk of infection in Australia; to estimate the residual risk of infection among potential solid organ donors in these groups when their antibody and nucleic acid test results are negative.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis of reports of the incidence and prevalence of HIV, HCV, and HBV in groups at increased risk of infection in Australia.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, government and agency reports, Australasian Society for HIV, Viral Hepatitis and Sexual Health Medicine conference abstracts, the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry, and National Health and Medical Research Council grants published 1 January 2000 - 14 February 2019; personal communications.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Residual risk of HIV infection was highest among men who have sex with men (4.8 [95% CI, 2.7-6.9] per 10 000 antibody-negative persons; 1.5 [95% CI, 0.9-2.2] per 10 000 persons who are both antibody- and nucleic acid-negative). Residual risk of HCV infection was highest among injecting drug users (289 [95% CI, 191-385] per 10 000 antibody-negative persons; 20.9 [95% CI, 13.8-28.0] per 10 000 antibody- and nucleic acid-negative persons). Residual risk for HBV infection was highest among injecting drug users (98.6 [95% CI, 36.4-213] per 10 000 antibody-negative people; 49.4 [95% CI, 18.2-107] per 10 000 persons who were also nucleic acid-negative).

CONCLUSIONS

Absolute risks of window period viral infections are low in people from Australian groups at increased risk but with negative viral test results. Accepting organ donations by people at increased risk of infection but with negative viral test results could be considered as a strategy for expanding the donor pool.

REGISTRATION

International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO), CRD42017069820.

Quantifying the risk of undetected HIV, hepatitis B virus, or hepatitis C virus infection in Public Health Service increased risk donors

To reduce the risk of HIV, hepatitis B virus (HBV), and hepatitis C virus (HCV) transmission through organ transplantation, donors are universally screened for these infections by nucleic acid tests (NAT). Deceased organ donors are classified as "increased risk" if they engaged in specific behaviors during the 12 months before death. We developed a model to estimate the risk of undetected infection for HIV, HBV, and HCV among NAT-negative donors specific to the type and timing of donors' potential risk behavior to guide revisions to the 12-month timeline. Model parameters were estimated, including risk of disease acquisition for increased risk groups, number of virions that multiply to establish infection, virus doubling time, and limit of detection by NAT. Monte Carlo simulation was performed. The risk of undetected infection was <1/1 000 000 for HIV after 14 days, for HBV after 35 days, and for HCV after 7 days from the time of most recent potential exposure to the day of a negative NAT. The period during which reported donor risk behaviors result in an "increased risk" designation can be safely shortened.

Hepatitis B and C virus infections transmitted through organ transplantation investigated by CDC, United States, 2014-2017

We evaluated clinical outcomes among organ recipients with donor-derived hepatitis B virus (HBV) or hepatitis C virus (HCV) infections investigated by CDC from 2014 to 2017 in the United States. We characterized new HBV infections in organ recipients if donors tested negative for total anti-HBc, HBsAg and HBV DNA, and new recipient HCV infections if donors tested negative for anti-HCV and HCV RNA. Donor risk behaviors were abstracted from next-of-kin interviews and medical records. During 2014-2017, seven new recipient HBV infections associated with seven donors were identified; six (86%) recipients survived. At last follow-up, all survivors had functioning grafts and five (83%) had started antiviral therapy. Twenty new recipient HCV infections associated with nine donors were identified; 19 (95%) recipients survived. At last follow-up, 18 (95%) survivors had functioning grafts and 14 (74%) had started antiviral treatment. Combining donor next-of kin interviews and medical records, 11/16 (69%) donors had evidence of injection drug use and all met Public Health Service increased risk donor (IRD) criteria. IRD designation led to early diagnosis of recipient infection, and prompt implementation of therapy, likely reducing the risk of graft failure, liver disease, and death.

Opioid epidemic and liver disease

Opioid use in the United States and in many parts of the world has reached epidemic proportions. This has led to excess mortality as well as significant changes in the epidemiology of liver disease. Herein, we review the impact of the opioid epidemic on liver disease, focusing on the multifaceted impact this epidemic has had on liver disease and liver transplantation. In particular, the opioid crisis has led to a significant shift in incident hepatitis C virus infection to younger populations and to women, leading to changes in screening recommendations. Less well characterized are the potential direct and indirect hepatotoxic effects of opioids, as well as the changes in the incidence of hepatitis B virus infection and alcohol abuse that are likely rising in this population as well. Finally, the opioid epidemic has led to a significant rise in the proportion of organ donors who died due to overdose. These donors have led to an overall increase in donor numbers, but also to new considerations about the better use of donors with perceived or actual risk of disease transmission, especially hepatitis C. Clearly, additional efforts are needed to combat the opioid epidemic. Moreover, better understanding of the epidemiology and underlying pathophysiology will help to identify and treat liver disease in this high-risk population.

Center-level trends in utilization of HCV-exposed donors for HCV-uninfected kidney and liver transplant recipients in the United States

Several single-center reports of using HCV-viremic organs for HCV-uninfected (HCV-) recipients were recently published. We sought to characterize national utilization of HCV-exposed donors for HCV- recipients (HCV D+/R-) in kidney transplantation (KT) and liver transplantation (LT). Using SRTR data (April 1, 2015-December 2, 2018) and Gini coefficients, we studied center-level clustering of 1193 HCV D+/R- KTs and LTs. HCV-viremic (NAT+) D+/R- KTs increased from 1/month in 2015 to 22/month in 2018 (LTs: 0/month to 12/month). HCV-aviremic (Ab+/NAT-) D+/R- KTs increased from < 1/month in 2015 to 26/month in 2018 (LTs: <1/month to 8/month). HCV- recipients of viremic and aviremic kidneys spent a median (interquartile range [IQR]) of 0.7 (0.2-1.6) and 1.6 (0.4-3.5) years on the waitlist versus 1.8 (0.5-4.0) among HCV D-/R-. HCV- recipients of viremic and aviremic livers had median (IQR) MELD scores of 24 (21-30) and 25 (21-32) at transplantation versus 29 (23-36) among HCV D-/R-. 12 KT and 14 LT centers performed 81% and 76% of all viremic HCV D+/R- transplants; 11 KT and 13 LT centers performed 76% and 69% of all aviremic HCV D+/R- transplants. There have been marked increases in HCV D+/R- transplantation, although few centers are driving this practice; centers should continue to weigh the risks and benefits of HCV D+/R- transplantation.

A mathematical model to describe survival among liver recipients from deceased donors with risk of transmitting infectious encephalitis pathogens

BACKGROUND

Between 2002 and 2013, the organs of 13 deceased donors with infectious encephalitis were transplanted, causing infections in 23 recipients. As a consequence, organs from donors showing symptoms of encephalitis (increased probability of infectious encephalitis (IPIE) organs) might be declined. We had previously characterized the risk of IPIE organs using data available to most transplant teams and not requiring special diagnostic tests. If the probability of infection is low, the benefits of a transplant from a donor with suspected infectious encephalitis might outweigh the risk and could be lifesaving for some transplant candidates.

METHODS

Using organ transplant data and Cox Proportional Hazards models, we determined liver donor and recipient characteristics predictive of post-transplant or waitlist survival and generated 5-year survival probability curves. We also calculated expected waiting times for an organ offer based on transplant candidate characteristics. Using a limited set of actual cases of infectious encephalitis transmission via transplant, we estimated post-transplant survival curves given an organ from an IPIE donor.

RESULTS

54% (1256) of patients registered from 2002-2006 who died or were removed from the waiting list because of deteriorated condition within 1 year could have had an at least marginal estimated benefit by accepting an IPIE liver with some probability of infection, with the odds increasing to 86% of patients if the probability of infection was low (5% or less). Additionally, 54% (1252) were removed from the waiting list prior to their estimated waiting time for a non-IPIE liver and could have benefited from an IPIE liver.

CONCLUSION

Improved allocation and utilization of IPIE livers could be achieved by evaluating the patient-specific trade-offs between (a) accepting an IPIE liver and (b) remaining on the waitlist and accepting a non-IPIE liver after the estimated waiting time.

Attitudes of Liver Transplant Candidates Toward Organs From Increased-Risk Donors

Increased-risk donor (IRD) organs make up a significant proportion of the deceased organ donor pool but may be declined by patients on the waiting list for various reasons. We conducted a survey of patients awaiting a liver transplant to determine the factors leading to the acceptance of an IRD organ as well as what strategies could increase the rate of acceptance. Adult liver transplant candidates who were outpatients completed a survey of 51 questions on a 5-point Likert scale with categories related to demographics, knowledge of IRDs, and likelihood of acceptance. A total of 150 transplant candidates completed the survey (age 19-80 years). Male patients constituted 67.3%. Many patients (58.7%) had postsecondary education. Only 23.3% of patients had a potential living donor, and 58/144 (40.3%) were not optimistic about receiving an organ in the next 3 months. The overall IRD organ acceptance rate was 41.1%, whereas 26.2% said they would decline an IRD organ. Women were more likely to accept an IRD organ (54.3% versus 34.7%; P = 0.02). Those who had a college education or higher tended to have lower IRD organ acceptability (28.3% versus 47.4%; P = 0.07). Acceptability also increased as the specified transmission risk of human immunodeficiency virus or hepatitis C virus decreased (P < 0.001). Patients were also more likely to accept an IRD organ if they were educated on the benefits of IRD organs (eg, knowledge that an IRD organ was of better quality increased overall acceptance from 41.1% to 63.3%; P < 0.001). Our survey provides insight into liver transplant candidates who would benefit from greater education on IRD organs. Strategies targeting specific educational points are likely to increase acceptability.

Living kidney donation in individuals with hepatitis C and HIV infection: rationale and emerging evidence

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

HIV-infected (HIV+) and hepatitis C virus-infected (HCV+) individuals with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) have decreased access to kidney transplantation. With new opportunities provided by the HIV Organ Policy Equity (HOPE) Act and direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) for HCV, we explore the potential risks and benefits of living donor kidney transplantation from HIV+ or HCV+ donors, from the perspective of both donor health and recipient outcomes.

RECENT FINDINGS

The HOPE Act permits organ donation from both deceased and living HIV+ persons to HIV+ recipients; however, there is only clinical experience with HIV+ deceased donors to date. Empirical evidence demonstrates a low but acceptable risk of ESRD in potential HIV+ living donors without comorbidities who have well-controlled infection in the absence of donation. With the availability of potent DAAs for eradication of HCV infection, growing evidence shows good outcomes with HCV seropositive and/or viremic deceased kidney donors, providing rationale to consider HCV+ living donors.

SUMMARY

HIV+ and HCV+ living donor kidney transplantation may improve access to transplant for vulnerable ESRD populations. Careful evaluation and monitoring are warranted to mitigate potential risks to donors and recipients.

Kidney transplant outcomes associated with the use of increased risk donors in children

Increased risk donors (IRDs) may inadvertently transmit blood-borne viruses to organ recipients through transplant. Rates of IRD kidney transplants in children and the associated outcomes are unknown. We used the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients to identify pediatric deceased donor kidney transplants that were performed in the United States between January 1, 2005 and December 31, 2015. We used the Cox regression analysis to compare patient and graft survival between IRD and non-IRD recipients, and a sequential Cox approach to evaluate survival benefit after IRD transplants compared with remaining on the waitlist and never accepting an IRD kidney. We studied 328 recipients with and 4850 without IRD transplants. The annual IRD transplant rates ranged from 3.4% to 13.2%. IRDs were more likely to be male (P = .04), black (P < .001), and die from head trauma (P = .006). IRD recipients had higher mean cPRA (0.085 vs 0.065, P = .02). After multivariate adjustment, patient survival after IRD transplants was significantly higher compared with remaining on the waitlist (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 0.48, 95% CI: 0.26-0.88, P = .018); however, patient (aHR: 0.93, 95% CI: 0.54-1.59, P = .79) and graft survival (aHR: 0.89, 95% CI: 0.70-1.13, P = .32) were similar between IRD and non-IRD recipients. We recommend that IRDs be considered for transplant in children.

Expanding deceased donor kidney transplantation: medical risk, infectious risk, hepatitis C virus, and HIV

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Due to the organ shortage, which prevents over 90 000 individuals in the United States from receiving life-saving transplants, the transplant community has begun to critically reevaluate whether organ sources that were previously considered too risky provide a survival benefit to waitlist candidates.

RECENT FINDINGS

Organs that many providers were previously unwilling to use for transplantation, including kidneys with a high Kidney Donor Profile Index or from increased risk donors who have risk factors for window period hepatitis C virus (HCV) and HIV infection, have been shown to provide a survival benefit to transplant waitlist candidates compared with remaining on dialysis. The development of direct-acting antivirals to cure HCV infection has enabled prospective trials on the transplantation of organs from HCV-infected donors into HCV-negative recipients, with promising preliminary results. Changes in legislation through the HIV Organ Policy Equity Act have legalized transplantations from HIV-positive deceased donors to HIV-positive recipients for the first time in the United States.

SUMMARY

Critical reexamination of deceased donor organs that were previously discarded has resulted in greater utilization of these organs, an increased number of deceased donor transplants, and the provision of life-saving treatment to more transplant waitlist candidates.

Solid organ transplantation of viral hepatitis C positive donor organs into viral hepatitis C negative recipients

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Strategies are needed to reduce waitlist mortality and increase transplantation rates. Advances in hepatitis C therapy has allowed the transplant community to look toward utilization of grafts from hepatitis C viremic donors to expand the organ pool. Use of such grafts for hepatitis C-negative patients is being evaluated and debated, and early trial data are emerging.

RECENT FINDINGS

Both hepatitis C antibody-positive/nucleic acid test-negative and viremic donors are currently underutilized. Outcomes for viral hepatitis C (HCV) viremic transplant recipients are improving in the setting of direct-acting antiviral therapy. Optimization of graft utilization from HCV 'positive' donors and expansion to use of viremic donors for HCV-negative recipients will likely reduce waitlist mortality and result in net overall reduction in healthcare expenditures.

SUMMARY

Herein, we provide a review of recent advancements relating to hepatitis C in solid organ transplant and outline future directions. A primary future focus will be data collection of outcomes of transplantation of grafts from HCV 'viremic' donors to nonviremic recipients in formal clinical trial protocols.

Donor-derived Viral Infections in Liver Transplantation

Donor-derived infections are defined as any infection present in the donor that is transmitted to 1 or more recipients. Donor-derived infections can be categorized into 2 groups: "expected" and "unexpected" infections. Expected transmissions occur when the donor is known to have an infection, such as positive serology for cytomegalovirus, Epstein Barr virus, or hepatitis B core antibody, at the time of donation. Unexpected transmissions occur when a donor has no known infection before donation, but 1 or more transplant recipients develop an infection derived from the common donor. Unexpected infections are estimated to occur in far less than 1% of solid organ transplant recipients. We will review the epidemiology, risk factors, and approaches to prevention and management of donor-derived viral infectious disease transmission in liver transplantation.