Outcomes of Adult Heart Transplantation Using Hepatitis C-Positive Donors

Utilization and outcomes of expanded criteria donors in adults with congenital heart disease

BACKGROUND

Use of donation after circulatory death (DCD) and hepatitis C virus (HCV) positive donors in heart transplantation have increased the donor pool. Given poor waitlist outcomes in the adult congenital heart disease (ACHD) population, we investigated waitlist outcomes associated with willingness to consider DCD and HCV+ offers and post-transplant outcomes following HCV+ and DCD transplantation for these candidates.

METHODS

Using the United Network for Organ Sharing database, we identified adult ACHD candidates and recipients listed or transplanted, respectively, between 01/01/2016 and 09/30/2023 for the HCV analysis and between 12/01/2019 and 09/30/2023 for the DCD analysis. Among candidates, we compared the cumulative incidence of transplant, with waitlist death/deterioration as a competing risk, by willingness to consider HCV+ and DCD offers. Among recipients of HCV+ (vs HCV-) and DCD (vs brain death [DBD]) transplants, we compared perioperative outcomes and post-transplant survival.

RESULTS

Of 1,436 ACHD candidates from 01/01/2016 to 09/30/2023, 37.0% were willing to consider HCV+ heart offers. Of 886 ACHD candidates from 12/01/2019 to 09/30/2023, 15.5% were willing to consider DCD offers. On adjusted analysis, willingness to consider HCV+ offers was associated with 84% increased likelihood of transplant, and willingness to consider DCD offers was associated with 56% increased likelihood of transplant. Of 904 transplants between 01/01/2016 and 09/30/2023, 6.4% utilized HCV+ donors, and of 540 transplants between 12/01/2019 and 09/30/2023, 6.9% utilized DCD donors. Recipients of HCV+ (vs HCV-) and DCD (vs DBD) heart transplants had similar likelihood of perioperative outcomes and 1-year survival.

CONCLUSIONS

ACHD candidates who were willing to consider HCV+ and DCD offers were more likely to be transplanted and had similar post-transplant outcomes compared to recipients of HCV- and DBD organs.

Mid-term Waitlist and Posttransplant Outcomes With Hepatitis C-positive Donor Hearts

BACKGROUND

This study evaluates the clinical trends and impact of hepatitis C virus-positive (HCV+) donors on waitlist and posttransplant outcomes after heart transplantation.

METHODS

The United Network for Organ Sharing registry was queried to identify adult waitlisted and transplanted patients from January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2022. In the waitlist analysis, the candidates were stratified into 2 cohorts based on whether they were willing to accept HCV+ donor offers. Waitlist outcomes included 1-y cumulative incidences of transplantation and death/delisting. In the posttransplant analysis, the recipients were stratified into 2 cohorts with and without HCV nucleic acid test (NAT)-positive donors. Outcomes included 1- and 4-y posttransplant survival. Propensity score-matching was performed. Risk adjustment was performed using multivariable Cox regression.

RESULTS

During the study period, the number of centers using HCV NAT+ donors increased from 1 to 65 centers, along with the number of transplants. In the waitlist analysis, 26 648 waitlisted candidates were analyzed, and 4535 candidates (17%) were approved to accept HCV+ donors. Approval to accept HCV+ donors was associated with a higher likelihood of transplantation and a lower likelihood of death/delisting within 1 y of waitlisting. In the posttransplant analysis, 21 131 recipients were analyzed, and 997 recipients (4.7%) received HCV NAT+ hearts. The 1- and 4-y posttransplant survival were comparable between the recipients of HCV NAT+ and NAT- donors. Furthermore, the similar 1- and 4-y posttransplant survival persisted in the propensity score-matched comparison and multivariable Cox regression analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Utilization of HCV+ donors is rising. Heart transplants using HCV+ donors are associated with improved waitlist and comparable posttransplant outcomes.

For your consideration: Benefits of listing as willing to consider heart offers from donors with hepatitis C

BACKGROUND

Despite excellent outcomes of heart transplants from hepatitis C virus (HCV)-positive donors (D+), many candidates are not listed to even consider HCV D+ offers.

METHODS

Using the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients, we identified adult (age ≥18 years) heart transplant candidates prevalent on the waitlist between 2018 and March 2023. We compared the likelihood of waitlist mortality or heart transplant by candidate willingness to consider HCV D+ offers using competing risk regression.

RESULTS

We identified 19,415 heart transplant candidates, 68.9% of whom were willing to consider HCV D+ offers. Candidates willing to consider HCV D+ offers had a 37% lower risk of waitlist mortality (subhazard ratio [SHR], 0.63; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.56-0.70; P < .001) than candidates not willing to consider HCV D+ offers, after adjustment for covariates and center-level clustering. Over the same period, heart transplant candidates willing to consider HCV D+ offers had a 21% higher likelihood of receiving a transplant (SHR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.7-1.26; P < .001). As a result, among candidates willing to consider HCV D+ offers, 74.9% received a transplant and 6.1% died/deteriorated after 3 years, compared to 68.3% and 9.1%, respectively, of candidates not willing to consider HCV D+ offers. Lower waitlist mortality also was observed on subgroup analyses of candidates on temporary and durable mechanical circulatory support.

CONCLUSIONS

Willingness to consider HCV D+ heart offers was associated with a 37% lower risk of waitlist mortality and a 21% higher likelihood of receiving a transplant. We urge providers to encourage candidates to list as being willing to consider offers from donors with hepatitis C to optimize their waitlist outcomes and access to transplantation.

The Public Health Service "Increased Risk" 2020 Policy Change Has not Improved Organ Utilization in the United States: A Nationwide Cohort Study

Objective

To assess the effects of the 2020 United States Public Health Service (PHS) "Increased Risk" Guidelines update.

Background

Donors labeled as "Increased Risk" for transmission of infectious diseases have been found to have decreased organ utilization rates despite no significant impact on recipient survival. Recently, the PHS provided an updated guideline focused on "Increased Risk" organ donors, which included the removal of the "Increased Risk" label and the elimination of the separate informed consent form, although the actual increased risk status of donors is still ultimately transmitted to transplant physicians. We sought to analyze the effect of this update on organ utilization rates.

Methods

This was a retrospective analysis of the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network database which compared donor organ utilization in the 2 years before the June 2020 PHS Guideline update for increased-risk donor organs (June 2018-May 2020) versus the 2 years after the update (August 2020-July 2022). The organ utilization rate for each donor was determined by dividing the number of organs transplanted by the total number of organs available for procurement. Student t test and multivariable logistic regression models were used for analysis.

Results

There were 17,272 donors in the preupdate cohort and 17,922 donors in the postupdate cohort; of these, 4,977 (28.8%) and 3,893 (21.7%) donors were considered "Increased Risk", respectively. There was a 2% decrease in overall organ utilization rates after the update, driven by a 3% decrease in liver utilization rates and a 2% decrease in lung utilization rates. After multivariable adjustment, donors in the postupdate cohort had 10% decreased odds of having all organs transplanted.

Conclusions

The 2020 PHS "Increased Risk" Donor Guideline update was not associated with an increase in organ utilization rates in the first 2 years after its implementation, despite a decrease in the proportion of donors considered to be at higher risk. Further efforts to educate the community on the safe usage of high-risk organs are needed and may increase organ utilization.

An integrated program to expand donor utilization in pediatric heart transplantation: Case report of successful transplant with multiple donor risk factors

BACKGROUND

Pediatric heart transplantation (HT) continues to be limited by the shortage of donor organs, distance constraints, and the number of potential donor offers that are declined due to the presence of multiple risk factors.

METHODS

We report a case of successful pediatric HT in which multiple risk factors were mitigated through a combination of innovative donor utilization improvement strategies.

RESULTS

An 11-year-old, 25-kilogram child with cardiomyopathy and pulmonary hypertension, on chronic milrinone therapy and anticoagulated with apixaban, was transplanted with a heart from a Hepatitis C virus positive donor and an increased donor-to-recipient weight ratio. Due to extended geographic distance, an extracorporeal heart preservation system (TransMedics™ OCS Heart) was used for procurement. No significant bleeding was observed post-operatively, and she was discharged by post-operative day 15 with normal biventricular systolic function. Post-transplant Hepatitis C virus seroconversion was successfully treated.

CONCLUSIONS

Heart transplantation in donors with multiple risk factor can be achieved with an integrative team approach and should be taken into consideration when evaluating marginal donors in order to expand the current limited donor pool in pediatric patients.

Heart transplantation: advances in expanding the donor pool and xenotransplantation

Approximately 65 million adults globally have heart failure, and the prevalence is expected to increase substantially with ageing populations. Despite advances in pharmacological and device therapy of heart failure, long-term morbidity and mortality remain high. Many patients progress to advanced heart failure and develop persistently severe symptoms. Heart transplantation remains the gold-standard therapy to improve the quality of life, functional status and survival of these patients. However, there is a large imbalance between the supply of organs and the demand for heart transplants. Therefore, expanding the donor pool is essential to reduce mortality while on the waiting list and improve clinical outcomes in this patient population. A shift has occurred to consider the use of organs from donors with hepatitis C virus, HIV or SARS-CoV-2 infection. Other advances in this field have also expanded the donor pool, including opt-out donation policies, organ donation after circulatory death and xenotransplantation. We provide a comprehensive overview of these various novel strategies, provide objective data on their safety and efficacy, and discuss some of the unresolved issues and controversies of each approach.

Modern advances in heart transplantation

Heart transplantation (HTx) is the only definitive therapy for patients with end stage heart disease. With the increasing global prevalence of heart failure, the demand for HTx has continued to grow and outpace supply. In this paper, we will review advances in the field of HTx along the clinical journey of a HTx recipient. Starting with the sensitized patient, we discuss current methods to define sensitization, and assays to help identify clinically relevant anti-HLA antibodies. Desensitization strategies targeting all levels of the adaptive immune system are discussed with emphasis on novel techniques such as anti-CD 38 blockade and use of the Immunoglobulin G-Degrading Enzyme of Streptococcus Pyogenes. We next discuss donor procurement and the resurgence of donation after circulatory death as a viable strategy to significantly and safely increase the donor pool. Post-transplant, we evaluate non-invasive surveillance techniques including gene expression profiling and donor-derived cell-free DNA. Last, we discuss the ground-breaking developments in the field of xenotransplantation.

Heart Transplant and Donors After Circulatory Death: A Clinical-Preclinical Systematic Review

INTRODUCTION

Heart transplantation is the treatment of choice for end-stage heart failure. There is a mismatch between the number of donor hearts available and the number of patients awaiting transplantation. Expanding the donor pool is critically important. The use of hearts donated following circulatory death is one approach to increasing the number of available donor hearts.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines utilizing Pubmed/MEDLINE and Embase. Articles including adult human studies and preclinical animal studies of heart transplantation following donation after circulatory death were included. Studies of pediatric populations or including organs other than heart were excluded.

RESULTS

Clinical experience and preclinical studies are reviewed. Clinical experience with direct procurement, normothermic regional perfusion, and machine perfusion are included. Preclinical studies addressing organ function assessment and enhancement of performance of marginal organs through preischemic, procurement, preservation, and reperfusion maneuvers are included. Articles addressing the ethical considerations of thoracic transplantation following circulatory death are also reviewed.

CONCLUSIONS

Heart transplantation utilizing organs procured following circulatory death is a promising method to increase the donor pool and offer life-saving transplantation to patients on the waitlist living with end-stage heart failure. There is robust ongoing preclinical and clinical research to optimize this technique and improve organ yield. There are also ongoing ethical considerations that must be addressed by consensus before wide adoption of this approach.

Utilization of hepatitis C virus infected donors in heart transplant recipients with elevated MELD-XI score

BACKGROUND

The advent of direct-acting antivirals has helped to increase the safe utilization of organs from hepatitis C virus positive (HCV+) donors. However, the outcomes of heart transplantation (HT) using an HCV+ donor are unclear in recipients with underlying liver disease represented by an elevated model for end-stage liver disease excluding international normalized ratio (MELD-XI).

METHODS

The United Network of Organ Sharing database was queried from Jan 2016 to Dec 2021. Post-transplant outcomes stratified by recipient MELD-XI score (low <10.37, medium, 10.38-13.39, and high >13.4) was compared between patients with HT from HCV+ (N = 792) and patients with HT from HCV-negative donors (N = 15,266).

RESULTS

The median MELD-XI score was comparable (HCV+, 12.1, vs. HCV-negative, 11.8, p = .37). In the HCV+ group, donors were older (33 vs. 31 years, p < .001). Ischemic time of donor hearts (3.48 vs. 3.28 h, p < .001) and travel distance (250 vs. 157 miles, p < .001) were longer in HCV+ group. In the Kaplan Meier analysis with a median follow-up of 750 days, survival was comparable between the two groups (2-year survival, MELD-XI Low: HCV+, 92.4 ± 3.6% vs. HCV-negative, 91.1 ±.8%, p = .83, Medium: HCV+ 89.2 ± 4.3% vs. HCV-negative, 88.2 ± 1.0%, p = .68, and High: HCV+, 84.9 ± 4.5% vs. HCV-negative, 84.6 ± 1.1%, p = .75) In multivariate Cox hazard models, HCV donors were not associated with mortality in each MELD-XI subgroup (Low: adjusted hazard ratio (aHR), 1.02, p = .94; Medium: aHR, .95, p = .81; and High: aHR, .93, p = .68).

CONCLUSION

Utilization of HCV+ hearts was not associated with an increased risk of adverse outcomes in recipients with an elevated MELD- XI score.

Hepatitis C and heart transplantation: An update

There are limited data regarding heart transplantation in the setting of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection in either recipients or donors, as the practice was infrequent, given concerns of worse post-transplant outcomes. This changed dramatically after the development of highly effective HCV therapies, namely direct-acting antivirals (DAAs). Additionally, nucleic acid testing currently in use establishes more precisely the risk of HCV transmission from donors. As a result, chronic HCV infection in itself is no longer a barrier for heart transplant candidates, and the use of HCV-positive organs for HCV-infected and non-infected transplant candidates has increased dramatically. A review of the literature revealed that in the pre-DAA era, HCV seropositive heart transplant patients had a higher mortality than their seronegative counterparts. However, short-term data suggest that the differences in survival have been erased in the DAA era. Heart transplantation from HCV-viremic donors to HCV-uninfected recipients has become increasingly common as the number of deceased donors with HCV viremia has increased over the past years. Preliminary outcome reports are very encouraging, although further data are needed with regard to long-term safety. New information continues to be incorporated to optimize protocols that guide this practice.

Hepatitis C virus-positive donors in HCV-negative recipients in liver transplantation: Is it possible in Mexico?

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is a worldwide public health problem associated with significant morbidity and mortality. In the context of liver transplantation, the demand for organs continues to exceed the supply, prompting the consideration of using organs from HCV-positive donors in HCV-negative recipients. The introduction of direct-acting antivirals (DAAs), which have demonstrated great efficacy in eradicating the virus, has made transplantation of organs from donors with HCV infection possible. The present article provides a brief review of the current evidence on the use of organs from HCV-infected patients.

Impact of Donor Hemodynamics on Recipient Survival in Heart Transplantation

BACKGROUND

Heart transplantation is the gold-standard therapy for end-stage heart failure, but rates of donor-heart use remain low due to various factors that are often not evidence based. The impact of donor hemodynamics obtained via right-heart catheterization on recipient survival remains unclear.

METHODS

The United Network for Organ Sharing registry was used to identify donors and recipients from September 1999-December 2019. Donor hemodynamics data were obtained and analyzed using univariate and multivariable logistical regression, with the primary endpoints being 1- and 5-year post-transplant survival.

RESULTS

Of the 85,333 donors who consented to heart transplantation during the study period, 6573 (7.7%) underwent right-heart catheterization, of whom 5531 eventually underwent procurement and transplantation. Donors were more likely to undergo right-heart catheterization if they had high-risk criteria. Recipients who had donor hemodynamic assessment had 1- and 5-year survival rates similar to those without donor hemodynamic assessment (87% vs 86%, 1 year). Abnormal hemodynamics were common in donor hearts but did not impact recipient survival rates, even when risk-adjusted in multivariable analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Donors with abnormal hemodynamics may represent an opportunity to expand the pool of viable donor hearts.

The Cost-effectiveness of Transplanting Hearts From Hepatitis C-infected Donors Into Uninfected Recipients

BACKGROUND

The DONATE HCV trial demonstrated the safety and efficacy of transplanting hearts from hepatitis C viremic (HCV+) donors. In this report, we examine the cost-effectiveness and impact of universal HCV+ heart donor eligibility in the United States on transplant waitlist time and life expectancy.

METHODS

We developed a microsimulation model to compare 2 waitlist strategies for heart transplant candidates in 2018: (1) status quo (SQ) and (2) SQ plus HCV+ donors (SQ + HCV). From the DONATE HCV trial and published national datasets, we modeled mean age (53 years), male sex (75%), probabilities of waitlist mortality (0.01-0.10/month) and transplant (0.03-0.21/month) stratified by medical urgency, and posttransplant mortality (0.003-0.052/month). We assumed a 23% increase in transplant volume with SQ + HCV compared with SQ. Costs (2018 United States dollar) included waitlist care ($2200-190 000/month), transplant ($213 400), 4-wk HCV treatment ($26 000), and posttransplant care ($2500-11 300/month). We projected waitlist time, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), lifetime costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs [$/QALY, discounted 3%/year]; threshold ≤$100 000/QALY).

RESULTS

Compared with SQ, SQ + HCV decreased waitlist time from 8.7 to 6.7 months, increased undiscounted life expectancy from 8.9 to 9.2 QALYs, and increased discounted lifetime costs from $671 400/person to $690 000/person. Four-week HCV treatment comprised 0.5% of lifetime costs. The ICER of SQ + HCV compared with SQ was $74 100/QALY and remained ≤$100 000/QALY with up to 30% increases in transplant and posttransplant costs.

CONCLUSIONS

Transplanting hearts from HCV-infected donors could decrease waitlist times, increase life expectancy, and be cost-effective. These findings were robust within the context of current high HCV treatment costs.

Expanding heart transplantation in 2022 and beyond

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Despite advances in the technology of mechanical circulatory support, the need for heart transplantation continues to grow. The longevity of heart transplants continues to be superior to mechanical solutions, though the short-term differences are shrinking. In this review, we cover three timely developments and summarize the recent literature.

RECENT FINDINGS

After stagnant rates of heart transplant activity for some years, recently, transplant volume has increased. The developments that have ignited interest have been the use of hepatitis C infected donors, which can now be safely transplanted with the advent of curative oral regimens, and the worldwide use of donors following withdrawal of life support as opposed to traditional brain death donors. In addition, the recent experience of human cardiac xenotransplantation has been very exciting, and though it is not of clinical utility yet, it holds the promise for a virtually unlimited supply of organs at some time in the future.

SUMMARY

Much work remains to be done, but together, all three of these developments are exciting and important to be aware of in the future. Each will contribute to additional donors for human heart transplantation and hopefully will alleviate suffering and death on the waiting list.

Donation after circulatory determination of death in heart transplant: impact on current and future allocation policy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Historically, the selection criteria for heart transplant candidates has prioritized posttransplant survival while contemporary allocation policy is focused on improving waitlist survival. Donor scarcity has continued to be the major influence on transplant allocation policy. This review will address the opportunity of donation after circulatory determination of death (DCDD) and potential impact on future policy revisions.

RECENT FINDINGS

In 2018, changes to U.S. heart allocation policy led to several intended and unintended consequences. Beneficial changes include reduced waitlist mortality and broader geographic sharing. Additional impacts include scarcer pathways to transplant for patients with a durable left ventricular assist device, increased reliance on status exceptions, and expanded use of temporary mechanical support. DCDD is anticipated to increase national heart transplant volumes by ∼30% and will impact waitlist management. Centers that offer DCDD procurement will have reduced waitlist times, reduced waitlist mortality, and higher transplant volumes.

SUMMARY

While DCDD will provide more transplant opportunities, donor organ scarcity will persist and influence allocation policies. Differential patient selection, waitlist strategy, and outcome expectations may indicate that allocation is adjusted based on the procurement options at individual centers. Future policy, which will consider posttransplant outcomes, may reflect that different procurement strategies may yield different outcomes.

Kidney transplant from HCV viremic donors to HCV-negative recipients and risk for de novo donor specific antibodies and acute rejection

BACKGROUND

Kidney transplantation from HCV-viremic donors into uninfected recipients is associated with excellent short-term outcomes. However, concerns regarding an increased risk for the development of de novo donor specific antibodies (DSA) and acute rejection have been raised in single center reports.

METHODS

A retrospective study of HCV-negative kidney-only transplant recipients between 2018 and 2020. Patients were grouped based on the donor HCV status into group 1; HCV-viremic donors, and group 2; HCV-negative donors. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW), with weights derived from the propensity score, were used to estimate the effect of donors' HCV-viremia on the recipients. The primary objective was to compare the 1-year incidence of de novo DSA. Secondary outcomes included group comparison of the incidence of biopsy proven acute rejection (BPAR), 1-year patient and allograft survival, and 1-year renal allograft function.

RESULTS

A total of 71 patients were included in the HCV NAT+ group, and 440 in the HCV- negative group. One-year incidence of de novo DSA was higher in the HCV NAT+ group in the IPTW weighted analysis (19% vs. 9%, p = .02). In the unweighted analysis, BPAR occurred in 7% of recipients in the HCV NAT+ group, compared to 3% in the control group (p = .06). However, due to the low event rate in the in the IPTW weighted groups, a statistical significance test could not be performed. Average estimated GFR was higher in the HCV-viremic group at 3 months (61 vs. 53 ml/min/1.73 m² p = .002), but comparable at 6 (59 vs. 56 ml/min/1.73 m² , p = .31) and 12 months (60 vs. 55 ml/min/1.73 m² , p = .07). Patient and allograft survival were comparable between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Kidney transplant from HCV-viremic donors was associated with an increased risk for the development of post-transplant de novo DSA in the first year after transplantation, but no difference in patient and graft survival.

Trends in cardiovascular medicine: Update on cardiac transplantation

Advanced heart failure affects more than 250,000 people in the United States alone and is associated with high risk of morbidity and mortality. Cardiac transplantation provides a cure for patients with advanced disease but has historically been limited by donor availability. Recent changes in the allocation system as well as advances in donor selection, procurement and desensitization protocols have served to widen the donor pool and increase the availability of cardiac transplantation for those in need. This review provides an update on recent advances in cardiac transplantation.

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.

Early Outcomes of Heart Transplantation Using Donation After Circulatory Death Donors in the United States

BACKGROUND

Limited donor availability and evolution in procurement techniques have renewed interest in heart transplantation (HT) with donation after circulatory death (DCD). The aim of this study is to evaluate outcomes of HT using DCD in the United States.

METHODS

The United Network for Organ Sharing registry was used to identify adult HT recipients from 2019 to 2021. Recipients were stratified between DCD and donation after brain death. Propensity-score matching was performed. Cox proportional hazards was used to identify independent predictors of 1-year mortality. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to estimate 1-year survival.

RESULTS

Of 7496 HTs, 229 DCD and 7267 donation after brain death recipients were analyzed. The frequency of DCD HT increased from 0.2% of all HT in 2019 to 6.4% in 2021 (P<0.001), and the number of centers performing DCD HT increased from 3 of 120 centers to 20 of 121 centers (P<0.001). DCD donors were more likely to be younger, male, and White. After propensity matching, 1-year survival was 92.5% for DCD versus 90.3% for donation after brain death (hazard ratio, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.44-1.43]; P=0.44). Among DCD HTs, increasing recipient age and waitlist time predicted 1-year mortality on univariable analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Rates of DCD HT in the United States are increasing. This practice appears safe and feasible as mortality outcomes are comparable to donation after brain death. Although this study represents early adopting centers, outcomes of the experience for DCD HT in the United States is consistent with existing international data and encourages broader utilization of this practice.

Donor Utilization in the Recent Era: Effect of Sex, Drugs, and Increased Risk

Background:

Heart transplantation volumes have increased in recent years, yet less than a third of donors are typically accepted for transplantation. Whether donor sex, donor drug use, or perception of increased risk affects utilization for transplantation is unclear.

Methods:

The United Network for Organ Sharing database was queried for donors from January 1, 2007, to December 31, 2017. Donor toxicology was collected when available. Multivariate analysis was conducted to examine correlations with donor utilization.

Results:

Between January 1, 2007, and December 31, 2017, there were 87 816 heart donors aged ≥15 years. The mean age was 42.7±15.8 years, and 24 831 donors (28.3%) were utilized for heart transplantation. Subsequent analyses focused on donors between 15 and 39 years old.

The strongest associations with donor acceptance were for male donor sex, blood type, hepatitis C antibody, donor age, left ventricular hypertrophy, and history of donor drug use. After removing hepatitis C, Public Health Service Increased Risk was identified as a strong negative predictor. Most positive drug toxicology results were associated with donor nonuse except for donors between 15 and 19 years of age. Exceptions included alcohol, marijuana, and cocaine. Opiates were associated with less utilization at all donor ages. The Public Health Service Increased Risk status was associated with significantly less utilization in all age groups except 15- to 19-year-old donors.

Conclusions:

While male donors were preferentially utilized, donors with drug use or those deemed Public Health Service Increased Risk were significantly less utilized for heart transplantation. Further consideration of such donors would be appropriate particularly as the demand for transplantation continues to increase.

Approaches and strategies to manage the hepatitis C virus-positive heart donor

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Cardiac transplantation remains the treatment of choice for patients with advanced heart failure, but is limited by a donor organ shortage. Utilization of hepatitis C virus (HCV)-positive donors has been recently adopted to expand access to heart transplantation. We review the history of HCV heart transplantation, modern drug therapy, and recent outcomes.

RECENT FINDINGS

Since the advent of direct-acting antiviral (DAA) therapy, several single-center studies, and retrospective reviews have demonstrated good short-term outcomes, shorter waitlist times, and clearance of viremia with recipients of HCV-positive hearts. Two principle approaches to treatment of recipients of HCV viremic donors are utilized. In the prophylactic strategy, therapy is initiated before viremia is detected compared with the preemptive approach where initiation of DAA is delayed until after viremia is detected. Future studies are needed to address uncertainty about medium and long-term outcomes of using HCV-positive hearts and to determine the optimal treatment timing and duration.

SUMMARY

Utilization of HCV-positive donors has expanded the heart donor pool and appears safe through the early posttransplant period. We suggest that prophylactic administration of the shortest effective course of a DAA pangenotypic agent should be the current standard of care.

Revolution in the diagnosis and management of hepatitis C virus infection in current era

Chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is a major global public health problem, particularly in developing part of the world. Significant advances have been made in the early diagnosis and treatment of the disease. Its management has been particularly revolutionized during the past two decades. In this review, we summarize the major advances in the diagnostic and management armamentarium for chronic HCV infection. The focus of the present review is on the newer directly acting anti-viral agents, which have revolutionized the management of chronic HCV infection. Management of uncomplicated chronic HCV infection and of specific complications and special at-risk populations of patients will be covered in detail. Despite the advent and approval of highly effective and well tolerable oral agents, still many challenges remain, particularly the affordability, the equitable distribution and access to later drugs. The World Health Organization aims to eliminate viral hepatitis including HCV by 2030 since its poses a major public health threat. There is an urgent need to ensure uniform and early access to diagnostic and therapeutic facilities throughout the world if the later goal has to be realized.

Patient selection for heart transplant: balancing risk

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Heart failure incidence continues to rise despite a relatively static number of available donor hearts. Selecting an appropriate heart transplant candidate requires evaluation of numerous factors to balance patient benefit while maximizing the utility of scarce donor hearts. Recent research has provided new insights into refining recipient risk assessment, providing additional tools to further define and balance risk when considering heart transplantation.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent publications have developed models to assist in risk stratifying potential heart transplant recipients based on cardiac and noncardiac factors. These studies provide additional tools to assist clinicians in balancing individual risk and benefit of heart transplantation in the context of a limited donor organ supply.

SUMMARY

The primary goal of heart transplantation is to improve survival and maximize quality of life. To meet this goal, a careful assessment of patient-specific risks is essential. The optimal approach to patient selection relies on integrating recent prognostication models with a multifactorial assessment of established clinical characteristics, comorbidities and psychosocial factors.

Recent Changes in Durable Left Ventricular Assist Device Bridging to Heart Transplantation

This study evaluates the impact of the recent United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) allocation policy change on outcomes of patients bridged with durable left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) to orthotopic heart transplantation (OHT). Adults bridged to OHT with durable LVADs between 2010 and 2019 were included. Patients were stratified based on the temporal relationship of their OHT to the UNOS policy change on October 18, 2018. The primary outcome was early post-OHT survival. In total, 9,628 OHTs were bridged with durable LVADs, including 701 (7.3%) under the new policy. Of all OHTs performed during the study period, the proportion occurring following durable LVAD bridging decreased from 45% to 34% (p < 0.001). The more recent cohort was higher risk, including more extracorporeal membrane oxygenation bridging (2.6% vs. 0.3%, p < 0.001), more mechanical right ventricular support (9.7% vs. 1.4%, p < 0.001), greater pretransplant ICU admission (22.8% vs. 8.7%, p < 0.001) more need for total functional assistance (62.8% vs. 53.0%, p < 0.001), older donor age (33.3 vs. 31.7 years, p < 0.001), and longer ischemic times (3.38 vs. 3.13 hours, p < 0.001). Despite this, early post-OHT survival was comparable at 30 days (96.1% vs. 96.0%, p = 0.89), 90 days (93.7% vs. 94.0%, p = 0.76), and 6 months (91.0% vs. 93.0%, p = 0.96), findings that persisted after risk-adjustment. In this early analysis, OHT following bridging with durable LVADs is performed less frequently and in higher risk recipients under the new allocation policy. Despite this, short-term posttransplant outcomes appear to be unaffected in this patient cohort in the current era.

National trends and outcomes of Heart-kidney transplantation using hepatitis c positive donors

BACKGROUND

This study evaluated the outcomes of combined heart-kidney transplantation in the United States using hepatitis C positive (HCV+) donors.

METHODS

Adults undergoing combined heart-kidney transplantation from 2015 to 2020 were identified in the United Network for Organ Sharing registry. Patients were stratified by donor HCV status. Kaplan-Meier curves were created with multivariable Cox regression models used for risk-adjustment in a propensity-matched cohort.

RESULTS

A total of 950 patients underwent heart-kidney transplantation of which 7.8% (n = 75) used HCV+ donors; 68% (n = 51) were viremic and 32% (n = 24) were non-viremic donors. Unadjusted 1-year recipient survival was similar between HCV+ versus HCV- donors (84 vs 88%, respectively; p = 0.33). Risk-adjusted analysis in the propensity-matched cohort showed HCV+ donor use did not confer increased risk of 1-year mortality (hazard ratio 0.63, 95% CI 0.17-2.32; p = 0.49). Sub-group analysis showed viremic and non-viremic HCV+ donors had similar 1-year survival as well (84 vs 84%; p = 0.95).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with recipients of HCV- donor dual heart-kidney transplants, recipients of HCV+ organs had comparable 1-year survival and clinical outcomes after combined transplantation. Although future studies should evaluate other outcomes related to HCV+ donor use, this practice appears safe and should be expanded further in the heart-kidney transplant population. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Center-level Utilization of Hepatitis C Virus-positive Donors for Orthotopic Heart Transplantation

BACKGROUND

The use of hepatitis C virus-positive (HCV+) donors has expanded the donor pool for orthotopic heart transplantation (OHT). This study evaluated center-level trends and utilization of HCV+ donors for OHT.

METHODS

Data were extracted from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients on adults (≥18 y) undergoing OHT between January 1, 2016 and December 31, 2019. Centers performing <10 OHTs during the study period were excluded. Donor utilization rates were evaluated at the center level. Center-level characteristics were compared between centers performing HCV+ donor hepatitis C virus-negative (HCV-) recipient OHTs and those not utilizing HCV+ donors for HCV- recipients.

RESULTS

A total of 10 134 patients underwent OHT, including 613 (6.05%) HCV+ donors transplanted into HCV- recipients. The number of HCV+ OHTs increased from 15 of 2512 (0.60%) in 2016 to 285 of 2490 (11.45%) in 2019 (P < 0.001). In 2016, among 105 centers performing OHTs, 7 (6.67%) utilized HCV+ donors compared to 2019 during which 55 (52.89%) of 104 centers utilized HCV+ donors (P < 0.001). In total, 57 of 107 (53.27%) centers utilized HCV+ donors during the study period. Centers utilizing HCV+ donors had higher overall donor utilization rates (7376/24 378 [30.26%] versus 3463/15 335 [22.58%], P < 0.001) and were higher volume as compared to nonutilizing centers (mean annual OHT volume 30.72 ± 1.21 versus 16.2 ± 1.40, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Although the use of HCV+ donors for OHT is rapidly expanding in the United States, almost half of transplant centers remain nonutilizers. Broader education and implementation of HCV+ donor protocols may be important in expanding OHT to more patients with end-stage heart failure.

Hepatitis C Positive Organ Donation in Heart Transplantation

Purpose of Review

To summarize outcomes to date, as well as important considerations and unanswered questions related to the use of hepatitis C virus (HCV) positive donors for heart transplantation.

Recent Findings

Outcomes from single-center studies and registry data to date suggest that among patients who develop donor-transmitted HCV after heart transplantation, direct-acting antiviral therapies (DAAT) are effective and well-tolerated, and that short-term survival is similar to that of patients transplanted with HCV - donors.

Summary

In an era marked by increasing numbers of HCV positive deceased donors and a growing imbalance between the demand and supply of donor hearts, utilization of HCV + donors is a feasible strategy to expand the donor pool and reduce waitlist times. Ongoing work is needed to clarify longer-term outcomes with the use of this strategy.

Innovations in Heart Transplantation: A Review

Advanced heart failure affects tens of thousands of people in the United States alone with high morbidity and mortality. Cardiac transplantation offers the best treatment strategy but has been historically limited by donor availability. Recently, there have been significant advances in organ allocation, donor-recipient matching, organ preservation and expansion of the donor pool. The current heart allocation system prioritizes the sickest patients to minimize waitlist mortality. Advances in donor organ selection including predicted heart mass calculations and more sophisticated antibody detection methods for allosensitized patients offer more effective matching of donors and recipients. Innovations in organ preservation such as with organ preservation systems have geographically widened the donor pool. The use of hepatitis C donors is possible with the advent of effective direct-acting antiviral agents to cure donor-transmitted hepatitis C. Finally, further expansion of the donor pool is occurring with the utilization of higher-risk donors with advanced age, medical comorbidities, and left ventricular dysfunction and advances in donation after circulatory death. This review provides an update on the new technologies and transplantation strategies that serve to widen the donor pool and more effectively match donors and recipients so that heart transplant candidates may derive the best outcomes from heart transplantation.

Impact of transplant center volume on donor heart offer utilization rates in the United States

BACKGROUND

We tested the hypothesis that transplant centers (TCs) with higher volumes have higher donor heart (DH) offer utilization rates.

METHODS

Using the Annual Data reports of the US Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network and the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) we reviewed all adult heart transplant offers between July 1, 2016 and June 29, 2019. Unadjusted donor offer utilization rates and observed to expected (O/E) DH utilization ratios adjusted using the SRTR model were calculated for each TC for all DH offers and for the following sub-categories: DH with left ventricular ejection fraction <60%, DH >40 years, DH >500 miles from TC, "hard-to-place hearts" (defined as those offered to >50 TCs) and DH designated as increased infectious risk. Univariable linear regression was used to identify a relationship between average yearly center volume and DH utilization.

RESULTS

During the study 118,841 total offers were made to 107 TCs and 8300 transplants were performed. The unadjusted utilization rate was not associated with TC volume for all donor offers (p = .517). However, among all subcategories other than DH >40 years, the unadjusted DH utilization rate was associated with TC volume (p < .05). In addition, using the adjusted SRTR O/E ratio, there was a significant impact of TC volume on utilization rate for all donor offers (for an increase TC volume of 10 transplants/year coefficient = 0.095, 95% confidence interval: 0.037-0.151, p = .001). This relationship persisted with an identifiable change for each of the subcategories (p ≤ .001).

CONCLUSIONS

TC volume is significantly correlated to DH offer utilization rate.

Association of donor hypertension and outcomes in orthotopic heart transplantation

The present study examined the impact of donor hypertension on recipient survival and offer acceptance practices in the United States. This was a retrospective study of all patients undergoing OHT from 1995 to 2019 using the United Network for Organ Sharing and Potential Transplant Recipient file databases. Hypertensive donors were stratified by Short (0-5 years) and Prolonged (> 5 years) hypertension. Multivariable logistic regression was used to analyze offer acceptance practices while Cox proportional-hazards models were used to compare mortality across groups. Of 38,338 heart transplants meeting study criteria, 5662 were procured from hypertensive donors (69% Short and 31% Prolonged). After adjustment, Prolonged donor hypertension was associated with increased mortality (hazard ratio, HR, 1.31, 95% confidence interval, CI, 1.04-1.64), while recipients of Short donors experienced no decrement in post-transplant survival. Both Short and Prolonged hypertension were independently associated with decreased odds of offer acceptance (odds ratio, OR .92 95%CI: .88-.96 and OR .93 95%CI: .88-.99, respectively). While prolonged untreated hypertension in OHT donors is associated with a slight decrement in recipient survival, donors with ≤5 years of hypertension yielded similar outcomes. Donor hypertension was associated with reduced organ offer acceptance, highlighting a potential source of organ underutilization.

Assessing predicted heart mass size matching in obese heart transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

Predicted heart mass (PHM) is currently the most reliable metric for donor-recipient size matching in heart transplantation. Undersizing PHM donor-recipient match more than 20% independently predicts reduced survival. However, it is unclear if this is the case in obese recipients, in whom size matching can be challenging. We examined the use of PHM undersized hearts in obese recipients and assessed its impact on survival.

METHODS

The United Network for Organ Sharing database was queried for adult patients undergoing heart transplantation from 1995 to 2020. Obese recipients (BMI ≥ 30) were categorized based on donor-recipient PHM match ≤-20% (undersized) or >-20% (size-matched). Nearest-neighbor propensity score matching was performed to adjust for baseline differences between cohorts. Temporal outcomes were compared by Kaplan-Meier survival analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 13,668 obese recipients met inclusion criteria, with 9.6% receiving undersized and 90.4% receiving size-matched hearts. The proportion of undersized donor hearts in obese recipients significantly decreased over the study period (16.2% [1995] to 7.4% [2019], NP-trend < 0.001). Propensity-score matching resulted in 984 well-matched pairs of undersized and size-matched obese recipients. Recipients of undersized hearts saw similar 30-day mortality (5.5% vs 6.0%, p= 0.11) and re-transplantation rates (1.2% vs 1.2%, p = 1.00) as size-matched recipients. Survival at 1 year (88.4% vs 87.9%, p = 0.14), and 15 years (35.1% vs 31.0%, p = 0.12) was similar across cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

A decreasing proportion of PHM undersized hearts are being utilized in obese recipients. However, utilizing PHM undersized hearts in obese recipients was not associated with a detriment in survival.

Hepatitis C viraemic organs in solid organ transplantation

Although rates of organ donation and solid organ transplantation have been increasing over the last few decades, demand for organs still greatly exceeds supply. Several strategies have been utilised to increase organ supply, including utilisation of high-risk (e.g. HCV antibody-positive) donors. In this context, organs from HCV antibody-positive donors have been used in recipients with chronic HCV since the early 1990s. Recently, transplantation of HCV-viraemic organs into HCV-naïve recipients has garnered significant interest, owing to the development of safe and highly effective direct-acting antivirals and increased experience of treating HCV in the post-transplant setting. Preliminary studies based largely in the US have shown excellent outcomes in kidney, liver, heart, and lung transplantation. This practice has the potential to significantly increase transplantation rates and decrease waitlist mortality; however, intentionally transmitting an infectious disease to recipients has important practical and ethical implications. Further, the generalisability of the US experience to other countries is limited by significant differences in HCV-viraemic donor populations. This review summarises the current data on this practice, discusses barriers to implementation, and highlights areas that warrant further study.

Cost-effectiveness of using hepatitis C viremic hearts for transplantation into HCV-negative recipients

Outcomes following hepatitis C virus (HCV)-viremic heart transplantation into HCV-negative recipients with HCV treatment are good. We assessed cost-effectiveness between cohorts of transplant recipients willing and unwilling to receive HCV-viremic hearts. Markov model simulated long-term outcomes among HCV-negative patients on the transplant waitlist. We compared costs (2018 USD) and health outcomes (quality-adjusted life-years, QALYs) between cohorts willing to accept any heart and those willing to accept only HCV-negative hearts. We assumed 4.9% HCV-viremic donor prevalence. Patients receiving HCV-viremic hearts were treated, assuming $39 600/treatment with 95% cure. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were compared to a $100 000/QALY gained willingness-to-pay threshold. Sensitivity analyses included stratification by blood type or region and potential negative consequences of receipt of HCV-viremic hearts. Compared to accepting only HCV-negative hearts, accepting any heart gained 0.14 life-years and 0.11 QALYs, while increasing costs by $9418/patient. Accepting any heart was cost effective (ICER $85 602/QALY gained). Results were robust to all transplant regions and blood types, except type AB. Accepting any heart remained cost effective provided posttransplant mortality and costs among those receiving HCV-viremic hearts were not >7% higher compared to HCV-negative hearts. Willingness to accept HCV-viremic hearts for transplantation into HCV-negative recipients is cost effective and improves clinical outcomes.

Effect of Hepatitis C Virus Infection on Heart Transplants in the Current Era

BACKGROUND

The effect of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection in recipients or donors on heart transplants is less known in the current era after the introduction of direct-acting antiviral agents (DAAs) in 2011.

METHODS

Using the United Network for Organ Sharing registry, 24 871 adult heart transplant recipients between 2005 and 2019 were identified. The trend in prevalence of HCV infected recipients and in utilization of HCV infected donors and their effect on the transplant outcomes were investigated in the past era versus the current era separated by 2011, using Cox proportional hazard regression.

RESULTS

HCV antibody positive recipients (n=520, 2.1%) had stable prevalence (P=0.18). They had a lower survival estimate when compared to HCV antibody negative recipients in the past era (55.3% versus 70.9% at 7 years; hazard ratio (HR), 1.56; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.27-1.91; P<0.001), however not in the current era (73.1% versus 71.5% at 7 years; HR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.75-1.32; P=0.98) (Pinteraction<0.001). Organ use from HCV antibody positive donors (n=371, 1.5%) was concentrated in the recent years (P<0.001) and provided the similar survival estimate up to 2 years (84.2% versus 87.6%; HR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.65-1.44; P=0.87). The similar findings were confirmed with a subgroup cohort with positive nucleic acid amplification test (NAT).

CONCLUSIONS

Positive HCV antibody in recipients did not adversely affect the long-term transplant outcomes in the current era. Graft utilization from positive HCV antibody or NAT positive donors are rapidly more prevalent and appeared to be promising up to 2 years posttransplant.

Trends in the utilization of marginal donors for orthotopic heart transplantation

BACKGROUND

This study explored trends in utilization of marginal donors for orthotopic heart transplantation (OHT) in the United States.

METHODS

Using the United Network for Organ Sharing database, adults (≥18 years) undergoing OHT between 2009 and 2019 were identified. Marginal donors were defined as having ≥2 of the following: age ≥50 years, ejection fraction less than 50%, ischemic time greater than 240 min, donor-to-recipient body mass index ratio less than 0.8, or donor inotrope use. Kaplan-Meier analysis was utilized to model survival with multivariable Cox regression analysis used for risk-adjustment.

RESULTS

A total of 23,580 recipients underwent OHT with 4896 (20.76%) receiving organs from marginal donors. The use of marginal donors decreased from 25.6% in 2009 to 16.0% in 2017 but accounted for 24.7% of OHTs in 2019. This recent increase in marginal donor use was largely attributable to increased use of donors with ischemic time greater than 240 min, whereas other marginal donor criteria remained stable. Among 140 centers, median marginal donor use was 20.07% (interquartile range, 14.17%-26.51%). An increasing proportion of marginal donors was not associated with increased center-level OHT volume (R²  < 0.001, p = .833). Marginal donor use was associated with reduced 1- (88.75% vs. 91.87%) and 5-year survival (76.73% vs. 80.08%, p < .001). Following adjustment, marginal donor use remained a significant predictor of post-OHT mortality (hazard ratio, 1.17; p < .001).

CONCLUSION

Marginal donors account for approximately 20% of OHTs performed in the United States. Despite a reduction in utilization over the past decade, the 2018 allocation change has resulted in a significant increase in use, largely attributable to longer ischemic times.

Survey of Clinician Opinions on Kidney Transplantation from Hepatitis C Virus Positive Donors: Identifying and Overcoming Barriers

Background

Transplant practices related to use of organs from Hepatitis C virus infected donors (DHCV+) is evolving rapidly.

Methods

We surveyed U.S. kidney transplant programs by email and professional society listserv postings between 7/19-1/20 to assess attitudes, management strategies, and barriers related to use of viremic (nucleic acid testing (NAT)+) donor organs in HCV uninfected recipients.

Results

Staff at 112 unique programs responded, representing 54% of U.S. adult kidney transplant programs and 69% of adult deceased donor kidney transplant volume in 2019. Most survey respondents were transplant nephrologists (46%) or surgeons (43%). Among responding programs, 67% currently transplant DHCV antibody+/NAT- organs under a clinical protocol or as standard of care. By comparison, only 58% offer DHCV NAT+ kidney transplant to HCV- recipients, including 35% under clinical protocols, 14% as standard of care, and 9% under research protocols. Following transplant of DHCV NAT+ organs to uninfected recipients, 53% start direct acting antiviral agent (DAA) therapy after discharge and documented viremia. Viral monitoring protocols after DHCV NAT+ to HCV uninfected recipient kidney transplantation varied substantially. 56% of programs performing these transplants report having an institutional plan to provide DAA treatment if declined by the recipient's insurance. Respondents felt a mean decrease in waiting time of ≥18 months (range 0-60) justifies the practice. Program concerns related to use of DHCV NAT+ kidneys include insurance coverage concerns (72%), cost (60%), and perceived risk of transmitting resistant infection (44%).

Conclusions

Addressing knowledge about safety and logistical/financial barriers related to use of DHCV NAT+ kidney transplantation for HCV uninfected recipients may help reduced discards and expand the organ supply.

Trends in the use of hepatitis C viremic donor hearts

OBJECTIVE

To examine trends in utilization of hearts from hepatitis C virus (HCV) viremic donors for transplantation, a strategy to expand organ availability.

METHODS

The United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) registry was queried for adult patients undergoing heart transplantation between 2015 and 2019. We excluded multiorgan transplants, incomplete data, and loss to follow-up. Nucleic acid testing (NAT) defined HCV status.

RESULTS

Between 2015 and 2019, a total of 11,393 adults underwent heart transplantation: 326 from HCV NAT⁺ donors and 11,067 from NAT^- donors. The use of NAT⁺ hearts increased from 1 in 2015 to 137 in 2018 against a static number of NAT^- organs. The use of NAT⁺ hearts varied significantly across regions and individual centers. More than 75% of NAT⁺ hearts were transplanted in the Northeast region, leading to further travel (mean, 299 miles vs 173 miles for NAT^- transplantations; P < .001), with longer ischemic times (mean: 3.52 hours vs 3.10 hours; P < .001). More than one-half of NAT⁺ transplantations were performed by 5 individual centers, and a single institution accounted for >20% of all transplantations from viremic donors. Survival in the 2 groups did not differ by Kaplan-Meier analysis (P = .240), and multivariable regression showed no differences in acute rejection (P = .455) or 30-day mortality (P = .490). Of the 326 recipients of NAT⁺ hearts, 38 seroconverted and 14 became viremic within 1 year. Survival was 100% in the viremic patients and 97.4% in seroconverted patients at 1 year.

CONCLUSIONS

Heart transplantation from HCV viremic donors continues to increase but varies significantly across UNOS regions and individual centers. Short-term outcomes are comparable, but effects of seroconversion and long-term outcomes remain unclear.

The Year in Cardiothoracic Transplantation Anesthesia: Selected Highlights from 2019

The highlights in cardiothoracic transplantation focus on the recent research pertaining to heart and lung transplantation, including expansion of the donor pool, the optimization of donors and recipients, the use of mechanical support, the perioperative and long-term outcomes in these patient populations, and the use of transthoracic echocardiography to diagnose rejection.