Patterns and Outcomes Associated with Patient Migration for Liver Transplantation in the United States

The role of an integrated referral program for patients with liver disease: A network between hub and spoke centers

INTRODUCTION

Access to Liver transplantation (LT) can be affected by several barriers, resulting in delayed referral and increased risk of mortality due to complications of the underlying liver disease.

AIM

To assess the clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with acute or chronic liver disease referred using an integrated referral program.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An integrated referral program was developed in 1 October 2017 based on email addresses and a 24/7 telephone availability. All consecutive adult patients with liver disease referred for the first time using this referral program were prospectively collected until 1 October 2021. Characteristics and outcomes of inpatients were compared with a historical cohort of patients referred without using the integrated referral program (1 October 2015-1 October 2017). Patients were further divided according to pre- and post-Covid-19 pandemic.

RESULTS

Two hundred eighty-one referred patients were considered. End stage liver disease was the most common underlying condition (79.3%), 50.5% of patients were referred as inpatients and 74.7% were referred for LT evaluation. When inpatient referrals (n = 142) were compared with the historical cohort (n = 86), a significant increase in acute liver injury due to drugs/herbals and supplements was seen (p = 0.01) as well as an increase in End stage liver disease due to alcohol-related liver disease and NASH, although not statistically significant. A significant increase in referrals for evaluation for Trans-jugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt placement was seen over time (5.6% vs. 1%; p = 0.01) as well as for LT evaluation (84.5% vs. 81%; p = 0.01). Transplant-free survival was similar between the study and control groups (p = 0.3). The Covid-19 pandemic did not affect trends of referrals and patient survival.

CONCLUSIONS

The development of an integrated referral program for patients with liver disease can represent the first step to standardize already existing referral networks between hub and spoke centers. Future studies should focus on the timing of referral according to different etiologies to optimize treatment options and outcomes.

Travel for Transplantation: A Review of Domestic and International Travel for Liver Transplantation in the United States

Content available: Audio Recording.

Patient Travel Distance and Post Lung Transplant Survival in the United States: A Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

In response to a longstanding Federal mandate to minimize the role of geography in access to transplant in the United States, we assessed whether patient travel distance was associated with lung transplant outcomes. We focused on the posttransplant time period, when the majority of patient visits to a transplant center occur.

METHODS

We present a cohort study of lung transplants in the United States between January 1, 2006, and May 31, 2017. Travel distance was measured from the patient's permanent home zip code to the transplant center using SAS URL access to GoogleMaps. We leveraged data from the US Census, US Department of Agriculture, and the Economic Innovations Group to assess socioeconomic status. Multivariable Cox models were used to assess graft survival.

RESULTS

We included 18 128 patients who met the inclusion criteria. Median distance was 69.6 miles. Among patients who traveled >60 miles to reach a transplant center, 41.8% bypassed a closer center and sought care at a more distant center. Patients traveling longer distances sought care at centers with a higher annual transplant volume. In the adjusted Cox Model, patients who traveled >360 miles had a slightly higher risk for posttransplant graft failure than patients traveling ≤60 miles (hazard ratio 1.09; 95% CI, 1.01-1.18), and a higher risk for treated acute rejection (hazard ratio, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.43-1.86).

CONCLUSIONS

Travel distance was significantly associated with post lung transplant survival. However, this effect was relatively modest. Patient travel distance is an important component of access to lung transplant care.

Migration of Patients for Liver Transplantation and Waitlist Outcomes

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Patients in need of liver transplantation may travel to improve their chance of receiving an organ. We evaluated factors to determine which transplant candidates travel to other regions to increase their chances of receiving a liver and effects of travel on waitlist outcomes.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study of all adult patients registered for primary deceased donor liver transplantation in the United States from January 2004 to December 2016. Zip code data were used to calculate the travel distance from a patient's residence to centers at which they were on the waitlist or received a liver transplant. Distant listing and migration were defined as placement on a waitlist and receipt of liver transplantation, respectively, outside the home transplantation region and greater than 500 miles from the home zip code. We assessed the effect of distant listing on outcomes (death and liver transplantation) and predictors of distant listing or migration using multivariable analyses.

RESULTS

There were 104,914 waitlist registrations during the study period; of these, 2930 (2.8%) pursued listing at a distant center. Of waitlist registrants, 60,985 received liver transplants, of whom 1985 (3.3%) had migrated. In a multivariable competing risk analysis in which liver transplantation was considered as a competing event, distant listing was associated with a 22% reduction in the risk of death within 1 year (subhazard ratio, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.70-0.88). Distant listing and migration were associated with non-black race, non-Medicaid payer, residence in a higher income area, and education beyond high school.

CONCLUSIONS

Placement on a liver transplant waitlist outside the home transplantation region is associated with reduced waitlist mortality and an increased probability of receiving a liver transplant. Geographic disparities in access to liver transplantation have disproportionate effects on patients who are minorities, have lower levels of education, or have public insurance.

Proximity to transplant center and outcome among liver transplant patients

In the United States, distance from liver transplant center correlates with worsened outcomes; the effects of geography elsewhere are unassessed. We performed a national registry analysis of United Kingdom listings for liver transplantation (1995-2014) and assessed whether travel time to transplant center correlates with outcome. There were 11 188 listings assessed (8490 transplanted), with a median travel time to center of 60 minutes (range 36-86). Of the national population, 3.38 × 10⁷ (55.1%) reside ≥60 minutes from a center, and 7.65 × 10⁶ (12.5%) >119 minutes. After competing risk analysis, increasing travel time was associated with an increased risk of death after listing (subdistribution hazard ratios relative to <60 minutes of 1.33 for 60-119 and 1.27 for >119 minutes; P < 0.001) and reduced likelihood of transplantation or recovery (0.94 and 0.86; P < 0.001). Among those transplanted, travel time was not associated with retransplant-free survival (P = 0.532). We used our model to examine optimal placement of a new center and identify a single site with a total travel time reduction of ≈10%. Our findings of disparities in accessibility of liver transplantation showed worse outcomes following listing in those distant from their transplant center, and our description of a method to model a new center complement existing data and support similar analyses of other networks.