Department of Surgery Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine Baltimore MD Department of Epidemiology Johns Hopkins School of Public Health Baltimore MD Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients Minneapolis MN Department of Surgery Weill Cornell Medicine New York NY.
Liver Transpl. 2022 Apr;28(4):571-580. doi: 10.1002/lt.26309. Epub 2021 Nov 16.
Despite a documented survival benefit, older liver donor (OLD, age ≥70) graft offers are frequently declined, with utilization worsening over the last decade. To understand how offer acceptance varies by center, we studied 1113 eventually transplanted OLD grafts from 2009 to 2017 using Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) data and random-intercept multilevel logistic regression. To understand how center-level acceptance of OLD graft offers might be associated with waitlist and posttransplant outcomes, we studied all adult, actively listed, liver-only candidates and recipients during the study period using Poisson regression (transplant rate), competing risks regression (waitlist mortality), and Cox regression (posttransplant mortality). Among 117 centers, OLD offer acceptance ranged from 0 (23 centers) to 95 acceptances, with a median odds ratio of 2.88. Thus, a candidate may be three times as likely to receive an OLD graft simply by listing at a different center. Centers in the highest quartile (Q4) of OLD acceptance (accepted 39% of OLD offers) accepted more nationally shared organs (Q4 versus Q1: 14.1% versus 0.0%, P < 0.001) and had higher annual liver transplant volume (Q4 versus Q1: 80 versus 21, P < 0.001). After adjustment, nationally shared OLD offers (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 0.16, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.13-0.20) and offers to centers with higher median Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) at transplant (aOR: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.62-0.87) were less likely to be accepted. OLD offers to centers with higher annual transplant volume were more likely to be accepted (aOR: 1.21, 95% CI: 1.14-1.30). Additionally, candidates listed at centers within the highest quartile of OLD graft offer acceptance had higher deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) rates (adjusted incidence rate ratio: 1.45, 95% CI: 1.41-1.50), lower waitlist mortality (adjusted subhazard ratio: 0.76, 95% CI: 0.72-0.76), and similar posttransplant survival (adjusted hazard ratio: 0.93, 95% CI: 0.86-1.01) when compared with those listed at centers in the lowest quartile of OLD graft offer acceptance. The wide variation in OLD offer acceptance supports the need for optimizing the organ offer process and efficiently directing OLD offers to centers more likely to use them.
尽管有文献证明老年供体(OLD,年龄≥70 岁)移植物具有生存获益,但 OLD 供体移植物的提供仍经常被拒绝,而且在过去十年中这种情况愈演愈烈。为了了解各中心之间的供体接受情况存在怎样的差异,我们利用 Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients(SRTR)的数据和随机截距多水平逻辑回归,对 2009 年至 2017 年间 1113 例最终移植的 OLD 供体进行了研究。为了了解中心对 OLD 供体提供的接受程度可能与等待名单和移植后结果之间的关系,我们利用泊松回归(移植率)、竞争风险回归(等待名单死亡率)和 Cox 回归(移植后死亡率),对研究期间的所有成年、活跃性肝移植候选者和受者进行了研究。在所研究的 117 个中心中,OLD 供体的接受率范围为 0(23 个中心)至 95%,中位数优势比为 2.88。因此,候选者仅仅通过在不同的中心登记,接受 OLD 供体的可能性就会增加三倍。在 OLD 接受率最高的四分位数(Q4)的中心(接受 39%的 OLD 供体)接受了更多的全国共享器官(Q4 与 Q1:14.1%与 0.0%,P<0.001),并且每年的肝脏移植量也更高(Q4 与 Q1:80 与 21,P<0.001)。调整后,全国共享的 OLD 供体(调整后的优势比[aOR]:0.16,95%置信区间[CI]:0.13-0.20)和移植时 OLD 供体中位终末期肝病模型(MELD)评分较高的中心(aOR:0.74,95%CI:0.62-0.87)接受 OLD 供体的可能性较低。在 OLD 供体接受率较高的中心接受 OLD 供体的可能性更大(aOR:1.21,95%CI:1.14-1.30)。此外,在 OLD 供体接受率最高的四分位数中心登记的候选者的死亡供肝移植(DDLT)率更高(调整后的发病率比:1.45,95%CI:1.41-1.50),等待名单死亡率更低(调整后的亚危险比:0.76,95%CI:0.72-0.76),移植后生存率相似(调整后的危险比:0.93,95%CI:0.86-1.01),与在 OLD 供体接受率最低的四分位数中心登记的候选者相比。OLD 供体接受率的广泛差异支持优化器官提供过程,并有效地将 OLD 供体提供给更有可能使用它们的中心。