Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
Transplantation Network (transplantation + network)
Selected AbstractsHuman leukocyte antigen and adult living-donor liver transplantation outcomes: An analysis of the organ procurement and transplantation network database,LIVER TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 10 2007S. Simona Jakab Human leukocyte antigen (HLA) compatibility has no clinically significant impact in cadaveric liver transplantation. Less is known regarding living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT). Our prior analysis of the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) database suggested a higher graft failure rate in patients who underwent LDLT from donors with close HLA match. We further investigated the effect of HLA-A, -B, and -DR matching on 5-yr graft survival in adult LDLT by analyzing OPTN data regarding adult LDLT performed between 1998 and 2005. We evaluated associations between 5-yr graft survival and total, locus-specific, and haplotype match levels. Separate analyses were conducted for recipients with autoimmune (fulminant autoimmune hepatitis, cirrhosis secondary to autoimmune hepatitis, primary biliary cirrhosis, primary sclerosing cholangitis) or nonautoimmune liver disease. Multivariable Cox proportional hazard models were used to evaluate interactions and adjust for potential confounders. Among 631 patients with available donor/recipient HLA data, the degree of HLA match had no significant effect on 5-yr graft survival, even when analyzed separately in recipients with autoimmune vs. nonautoimmune liver disease. To be able to include all 1,838 adult LDLTs, we considered a first-degree related donor as substitute for a close HLA match. We found no difference in graft survival in related vs. unrelated pairs. In conclusion, our results show no detrimental impact of close HLA matching on graft survival in adult LDLT, including in recipients with underlying autoimmune liver disease. Liver Transpl 13:1405,1413, 2007. © 2007 AASLD. [source] Pediatric living donor lobar lung transplantationPEDIATRIC TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 7 2006Stuart C. Sweet Abstract:, Living donor lobar lung transplantation (LDLLT) was developed in order to mitigate the growing competition for deceased donor (DD) lungs and resultant increase in waiting list mortality. Because each of the two donor lobes serves as an entire lung for the recipient, donors who are taller than the recipient are preferred. Therefore LDLLT is particularly well suited for pediatric recipients for whom adults serve as donors. Although long-term outcomes after LDLLT reported by the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) are worse compared with DD recipients, overall pediatric outcomes as well as single center reports from the most experienced programs are more promising. Particularly encouraging are the findings that bronchiolitis obliterans (OB) is less frequent or less severe in LDLLT recipients in comparison to DD recipients. Moreover, outcomes may be improved by careful selection of donors to ensure adequately sized donor lobes and minimization of infectious risks. Although no donor deaths have been reported, there is a moderate risk of significant short-term complications. Long-term follow-up has not been reported. The use of LDLLT has decreased in recent years, and the recent change by the OPTN to an urgency/benefit allocation system for DD lungs in patients 12 yr and older may further reduce the demand. Nonetheless, we anticipate that LDLLT will continue to be utilized in select circumstances, particularly in children under 12 where access to DD organs remains challenging. [source] Database Comparison of the Adult-to-Adult Living Donor Liver Transplantation Cohort Study (A2ALL) and the SRTR U.S. Transplant Registry,AMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 7 2010B. W. Gillespie Data submitted by transplant programs to the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) are used by the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) for policy development, performance evaluation and research. This study compared OPTN/SRTR data with data extracted from medical records by research coordinators from the nine-center A2ALL study. A2ALL data were collected independently of OPTN data submission (48 data elements among 785 liver transplant candidates/recipients; 12 data elements among 386 donors). At least 90% agreement occurred between OPTN/SRTR and A2ALL for 11/29 baseline recipient elements, 4/19 recipient transplant or follow-up elements and 6/12 donor elements. For the remaining recipient and donor elements, >10% of values were missing in OPTN/SRTR but present in A2ALL, confirming that missing data were largely avoidable. Other than variables required for allocation, the percentage missing varied widely by center. These findings support an expanded focus on data quality control by OPTN/SRTR for a broader variable set than those used for allocation. Center-specific monitoring of missing values could substantially improve the data. [source] Heart Transplantation in the United States, 1999,2008AMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 4p2 2010M. R. Johnson This article features 1999,2008 trends in heart transplantation, as seen in data from the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) and the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR). Despite a 32% decline in actively listed candidates over the decade, there was a 20% increase from 2007 to 2008. There continues to be an increase in listed candidates diagnosed with congenital heart disease or retransplantation. The proportion of patients listed as Status 1A and 1B continues to increase, with a decrease in Status 2 listings. Waiting list mortality decreased from 2000 through 2007, but increased 18% from 2007 to 2008; despite the increase in waiting list death rates in 2008, waiting list mortality for Status 1A and Status 1B continues to decrease. Recipient numbers have varied by 10% over the past decade, with an increased proportion of transplants performed in infants and patients above 65 years of age. Despite the increase in Status 1A and Status 1B recipients at transplant, posttransplant survival has continued to improve. With the rise in infant candidates for transplantation and their high waiting list mortality, better means of supporting infants in need of transplant and allocation of organs to infant candidates is clearly needed. [source] Transplantation of Kidneys from Donors at Increased Risk for Blood-Borne Viral Infection: Recipient Outcomes and Patterns of Organ UseAMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 10 2009P. P. Reese Kidney transplantation from deceased donors classified as increased risk for viral infection by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) is controversial. Analyses of Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) data from 7/1/2004 to 7/1/2006 were performed. The primary cohort included 48 054 adults added to the kidney transplant wait list. Compared to receiving a standard criteria donor (SCD) kidney or remaining wait-listed, CDC recipients (HR 0.80, p = 0.18) had no significant difference in mortality. In a secondary cohort of 19 872 kidney recipients at 180 centers, SCD (reference) and CDC (HR 0.91, p = 0.16) recipients had no difference in the combined endpoint of allograft failure or death. Among centers performing >10 kidney transplants during the study period, the median proportion of CDC transplants/total transplants was 7.2% (range 1.1,35.6%). Higher volume transplant centers were more likely to use CDC kidneys compared to low and intermediate volume centers (p < 0.01). An analysis of procured kidneys revealed that 6.8% of SCD versus 7.8% of CDC (p = 0.13) kidneys were discarded. In summary, center use of CDC kidneys varied widely, and recipients had good short-term outcomes. OPTN should collect detailed data about long-term outcomes and recipient viral testing so the potential risks of CDC kidneys can be fully evaluated. [source] Donor-Derived Disease Transmission Events in the United States: Data Reviewed by the OPTN/UNOS Disease Transmission Advisory CommitteeAMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 8 2009M. G. Ison Donor-derived disease transmission is increasingly recognized as a source of morbidity and mortality among transplant recipients. Policy 4.7 of the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) currently requires reporting of donor-derived events. All potential donor-derived transmission events (PDDTE) reported to OPTN/UNOS were reviewed by the Disease Transmission Advisory Committee (DTAC). Summary data from January 1, 2005,December 31, 2007, were prepared for presentation. Reports of PDDTE have increased from 7 in 2005, the first full year data were collected, to 60 in 2006 and to 97 in 2007. More detailed information is available for 2007; a classification system for determining likelihood of donor-derived transmission was utilized. In 2007, there were four proven and one possible donor-derived malignancy transmissions and four proven, two probable and six possible donor-derived infectious diseases transmissions. There were nine reported recipient deaths attributable to proven donor transmissions events arising from eight donors during 2007. Although recognized transmission events resulted in significant morbidity and mortality, transmission was reported in only 0.96% of deceased donor donations overall. Improved reporting, through enhanced recognition and communication, will be critical to better estimate the transmission risk of infection and malignancy through organ transplantation. [source] Heart Transplantation in the United States, 1998,2007AMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 4p2 2009J. D. Vega This article highlights trends in heart transplantation from 1998 to 2007, using data from the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) and the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR). The number of candidates actively awaiting heart transplantation has declined steadily, from 2525 in 1998 to 1408 in 2007, a 44% decrease. Despite this decline, a larger proportion of patients are listed as either Status 1A or 1B, likely secondary to increased use of mechanical circulatory support. During this time, the overall death rate among patients awaiting heart transplantation fell from 220 to 142 patients per 1000 patient-years at risk; this likely reflects better medical and surgical options for those with end-stage heart failure. This trend was noted across all racial groups, both sexes, all disease etiologies (retransplantation excepted) and all status groups. Recipient numbers were relatively stable over the past decade. In 2007, 2207 transplants were performed, although the proportion of patients transplanted as Status 1A shifted from 34% to 50%. A trend toward transplanting more patients above 65 years of age was seen. Adjusted patient (and graft) survival at 3 months, 1, 5 and 10 years after transplantation has gradually, but significantly, improved during the same period; current patient survival estimates are 93%, 88%, 74% and 55%, respectively. [source] Innovations in the Assessment of Transplant Center Performance: Implications for Quality ImprovementAMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 4p2 2009D. A. Axelrod Continuous quality improvement efforts have become a central focus of leading health care organizations. The transplant community has been a pioneer in periodic review of clinical outcomes to ensure the optimal use of limited donor organs. Through data collected from the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) and analyzed by the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR), transplantation professionals have intermittent access to specific, accurate and clinically relevant data that provides information to improve transplantation. Statistical process control techniques, including cumulative sum charts (CUSUM), are designed to provide continuous, real-time assessment of clinical outcomes. Through the use of currently collected data, CUSUMs can be constructed that provide risk-adjusted program-specific data to inform quality improvement programs. When retrospectively compared to currently available data reporting, the CUSUM method was found to detect clinically significant changes in center performance more rapidly, which has the potential to inform center leadership and enhance quality improvement efforts. [source] Transplant Center Volume and Outcomes After Liver RetransplantationAMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 2 2009P. P. Reese Liver retransplantation surgery has a high rate of allograft failure due to patient comorbidities and technical demands of the procedure. Success of liver retransplantation could depend on surgeon experience and processes of care that relate to center volume. We performed a retrospective cohort study of adult liver retransplantation procedures performed from January 1, 1996 through December 31, 2005 using registry data from the Organ Procurement Transplantation Network. The primary outcome was 1-year allograft failure. Liver transplant centers were categorized as small, intermediate or high volume by dividing overall liver transplants into three tertiles of approximately equal size. Mean annual volume of overall liver transplants was <50 for low-volume centers, 50,88 for intermediate-volume centers and >88 for high-volume centers. The primary analysis consisted of 3977 liver retransplantation patients. The unadjusted risk of 1-year allograft failure was 37.8%. In multivariable logistic regression, the risk of 1-year allograft failure was not significantly different between low- (reference), intermediate- (OR 0.86, CI 0.72,1.03, p = 0.11) and high-volume centers (OR 0.88, CI 0.74,1.04, p = 0.14). Results were similar when the analysis was limited to retransplantation performed >160 days after initial transplantation. Center volume is an imprecise surrogate measure for 1-year outcomes after liver retransplantation. [source] The Evolution and Direction of OPTN Oversight of Live Organ Donation and Transplantation in the United StatesAMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 1 2009R. S. Brown For more than 20 years, the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) has developed policies and bylaws relating to equitable allocation of deceased donor organs for transplantation. United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) operates the OPTN under contract with the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Until recent years, the OPTN had little defined authority regarding living donor organ for transplantation except for the collection of data relating to living donor transplants. Beginning with the implementation of the OPTN Final Rule in 2000, and continuing with more recent announcements, the OPTN's role in living donation has grown. Its responsibilities now include monitoring of living donor outcomes, promoting equity in nondirected living donor transplantation and ensuring that transplant programs have expertise and established protocols to promote the safety of living donors and recipients. The purpose of this article is to describe the evolving mandates for the OPTN in living donation, as well as the network's recent activities and ongoing efforts. [source] Development of the New Lung Allocation System in the United StatesAMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 5p2 2006T. M. Egan This article reviews the development of the new U.S. lung allocation system that took effect in spring 2005. In 1998, the Health Resources and Services Administration of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services published the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) Final Rule. Under the rule, which became effective in 2000, the OPTN had to demonstrate that existing allocation policies met certain conditions or change the policies to meet a range of criteria, including broader geographic sharing of organs, reducing the use of waiting time as an allocation criterion and creating equitable organ allocation systems using objective medical criteria and medical urgency to allocate donor organs for transplant. This mandate resulted in reviews of all organ allocation policies, and led to the creation of the Lung Allocation Subcommittee of the OPTN Thoracic Organ Transplantation Committee. This paper reviews the deliberations of the Subcommittee in identifying priorities for a new lung allocation system, the analyses undertaken by the OPTN and the Scientific Registry for Transplant Recipients and the evolution of a new lung allocation system that ranks candidates for lungs based on a Lung Allocation Score, incorporating waiting list and posttransplant survival probabilities. [source] Direction of the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network and United Network for Organ Sharing Regarding the Oversight of Live Donor Transplantation and Solicitation for OrgansAMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 1 2006F. L. Delmonico The Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) operated by United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) has taken recent steps to address public solicitation for organ donors and its oversight of live donor transplantation. This report provides the direction of the OPTN regarding deceased donor solicitation. The OPTN has authority under federal law to equitably allocate deceased donor organs within a single national network based upon medical criteria, not upon one's social or economic ability to utilize resources not available to all on the waiting list. The OPTN makes a distinction between solicitations for a live donor organ versus solicitations for directed donation of deceased organs. As to live donor solicitation, the OPTN cannot regulate or restrict ways relationships are developed in our society, nor does it seek to do so. OPTN members have a responsibility of helping protect potential recipients from hazards that can arise from public appeals for live donor organs. Oversight and support of the OPTN for live donor transplantation is now detailed by improving the reporting of live donor follow-up, by providing a mechanism for facilitating anonymous live kidney donation, and by providing information for potential live kidney donors via the UNOS Transplant LivingSM website. [source] | ||||||||||