Wall, Anji

Normothermic regional perfusion (NRP) adoption for donation after circulatory death (DCD) liver transplantation in the United States has been growing, but there remains a higher rate of non-utilization of NRP DCD liver grafts as compared with donation after brain death liver grafts. Six transplant centers and 1 organ procurement organization (OPO) with substantial NRP liver procurement experience performed retrospective reviews of all NRP procurement attempts from September 1, 2021, until March 1, 2024, identifying opportunities for utilization. Five of the 6 transplant centers had prospectively collected data on all accepted livers with NRP intent. The transplant center's intention to utilize DCD donors included 329 livers accepted for transplantation before withdrawal, 252 (76.6%) potential donors expired within the hospital timeframe for donation, and 168 (66.7%) livers were transplanted. Fifty-seven opportunities for utilization were identified by transplant centers, plus 11 from the OPO: most were due to exceeding a functional warm ischemic time limit (n=26), other reasons (n=17), and functional assessment (n=16). The lessons learned by centers in this study provide guidance for newer NRP centers and for OPOs in identifying opportunities for utilization of NRP DCD grafts that have historically been declined.

The TransMet trial and Norwegian studies have shown excellent outcomes in highly selected patients undergoing liver transplant (LT) for unresectable colorectal liver metastases (uCRLM). Our aim is to provide an updated analysis of the current state of LT for uCRLM in the United States. Adult patients with a diagnosis of uCRLM listed for LT between December 2017 and March 2025 were identified from the United Network for Organ Sharing database and analyzed. An analysis of living donor LT (LDLT) and deceased donor LT (DDLT) was performed. During this period, 222 patients were listed, and 158 received an LT across 33 centers. Of these, 76 (48.1%) underwent LDLT, and 82 patients (51.9%) underwent DDLT. Of the 82 deceased donors, 56 (68.2%) were out-of-sequence offers. Overall, the 3-year survival and disease-free survival rates were 66.7% and 44.0%, respectively. The 3-year survival for LDLT and DDLT was 74.1% and 57.3% ( p =0.04), respectively. While these results have not yet reached the acceptable threshold established for other LT indications, they have improved and are expected to continue improving after the implementation of prioritization points. Given the potential variability of oncologic selection criteria and graft quality, we call for the standardization of nationally accepted selection criteria for listing patients for LT with uCRLM and for providing early access to high-quality organs. To achieve this, it is imperative to create, update, and maintain national databases that allow for the collection of more granular oncological variables.

Importance Despite the unmet need for donor organs, organ use from donation after circulatory determination of death (DCD) donors has been limited by inferior transplant outcomes. Normothermic regional perfusion (NRP) improves recipient outcomes and organ utilization from DCD donors. There is variability in NRP policies and experience among US organ procurement organizations (OPOs). Objectives To determine OPO experience, identify operational inconsistencies, and explore needs related to NRP. Design, Setting, and Participants This survey study included 55 OPOs in the US that had recovered DCD organs and completed a survey on operational, administrative, and educational components related to NRP in November to December 2023. Data analysis was performed from February to April 2024. Main Outcome and Measures The primary outcome was the number of OPOs participating in and/or anticipating NRP participation. Secondary outcomes were NRP implementation barriers, OPO education practices, and future needs regarding consensus NRP recommendations and standards. Results Of 55 respondents, 11 (20%) were chief executive officers, 8 (15%) were chief operating officers, and 36 (65%) were medical directors or chief clinical officers. Forty-nine OPOs facilitated NRP cases: 26 OPOs (53%) facilitated both thoracoabdominal NRP (TA-NRP) and abdominal NRP (A-NRP) cases, 16 OPOs (33%) facilitated only TA-NRP, and 7 OPOs (14%) facilitated only A-NRP. OPOs reported 606 NRP cases (421 TA-NRP [69%], 185 A-NRP [31%]); median (range) case experience was 8 (1-52). Fifty-two of 55 OPOs (95%) thought standardized guidance documents would be helpful. All 49 OPOs facilitated NRP at a transplant center’s request; 39 (80%) had NRP initiated by a nonlocal transplant center. Twenty-three of 49 OPOs (47%) participated in NRP without a policy and without a policy pending approval. Positive donor hospital feedback was received by 29 OPOs (59%), primarily focused on increased organs transplanted and prerecovery communication. Allocation challenges were experienced by 21 OPOs (43%); their median (range) case volume was higher than those with no reported allocation challenges (11 [3-52] vs 6.5 [1-29]; P = .03). Eleven OPOs (22%) had incorporated NRP into general donor hospital education. Conclusions In this survey study of US OPOs, wide variation existed with respect to NRP experience and practice. Allocation challenges occurred more frequently with increased NRP experience. NRP guidelines and standardization were desired by most OPOs to decrease allocation challenges and maximize the gift of organ donation.

Importance Normothermic regional perfusion (NRP) is an emerging recovery modality for transplantable allografts from controlled donation after circulatory death (cDCD) donors. In the US, only 11.4% of liver recipients who are transplanted from a deceased donor receive a cDCD liver. NRP has the potential to safely expand the US donor pool with improved transplant outcomes as compared with standard super rapid recovery (SRR). Objective To assess outcomes of US liver transplants using controlled donation after circulatory death livers recovered with normothermic regional perfusion vs standard super rapid recovery. Design, Setting, and Participants This was a retrospective, observational cohort study comparing liver transplant outcomes from cDCD donors recovered by NRP vs SRR. Outcomes of cDCD liver transplant from January 2017 to May 2023 were collated from 17 US transplant centers and included livers recovered by SRR and NRP (thoracoabdominal NRP [TA-NRP] and abdominal NRP [A-NRP]). Seven transplant centers used NRP, allowing for liver allografts to be transplanted at 17 centers; 10 centers imported livers recovered via NRP from other centers. Exposures cDCD livers were recovered by either NRP or SRR. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was ischemic cholangiopathy (IC). Secondary end points included primary nonfunction (PNF), early allograft dysfunction (EAD), biliary anastomotic strictures, posttransplant length of stay (LOS), and patient and graft survival. Results A total of 242 cDCD livers were included in this study: 136 recovered by SRR and 106 recovered by NRP (TA-NRP, 79 and A-NRP, 27). Median (IQR) NRP and SRR donor age was 30.5 (22-44) years and 36 (27-49) years, respectively. Median (IQR) posttransplant LOS was significantly shorter in the NRP cohort (7 [5-11] days vs 10 [7-16] days; P < .001). PNF occurred only in the SRR allografts group (n = 2). EAD was more common in the SRR cohort (123 of 136 [56.1%] vs 77 of 106 [36.4%]; P = .007). Biliary anastomotic strictures were increased 2.8-fold in SRR recipients (7 of 105 [6.7%] vs 30 of 134 [22.4%]; P = .001). Only SRR recipients had IC (0 vs 12 of 133 [9.0%]; P = .002); IC-free survival by Kaplan-Meier was significantly improved in NRP recipients. Patient and graft survival were comparable between cohorts. Conclusion and Relevance There was comparable patient and graft survival in liver transplant recipients of cDCD donors recovered by NRP vs SRR, with reduced rates of IC, biliary complications, and EAD in NRP recipients. The feasibility of A-NRP and TA-NRP implementation across multiple US transplant centers supports increasing adoption of NRP to improve organ use, access to transplant, and risk of wait-list mortality.

The liver transplantation (LT) evaluation and waitlisting process is subject to variations in care that can impede quality. The American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD) Practice Metrics Committee (PMC) developed quality measures and patient-reported experience measures along the continuum of pre-LT care to reduce care variation and guide patient-centered care. Following a systematic literature review, candidate pre-LT measures were grouped into 4 phases of care: referral, evaluation and waitlisting, waitlist management, and organ acceptance. A modified Delphi panel with content expertise in hepatology, transplant surgery, psychiatry, transplant infectious disease, palliative care, and social work selected the final set. Candidate patient-reported experience measures spanned domains of cognitive health, emotional health, social well-being, and understanding the LT process. Of the 71 candidate measures, 41 were selected: 9 for referral; 20 for evaluation and waitlisting; 7 for waitlist management; and 5 for organ acceptance. A total of 14 were related to structure, 17 were process measures, and 10 were outcome measures that focused on elements not typically measured in routine care. Among the patient-reported experience measures, candidates of LT rated items from understanding the LT process domain as the most important. The proposed pre-LT measures provide a framework for quality improvement and care standardization among candidates of LT. Select measures apply to various stakeholders such as referring practitioners in the community and LT centers. Clinically meaningful measures that are distinct from those used for regulatory transplant reporting may facilitate local quality improvement initiatives to improve access and quality of care.

On June 3, 2023, the American Society of Transplant Surgeons convened a meeting in San Diego, California to (1) develop a consensus statement with supporting data on the ethical tenets of thoracoabdominal normothermic regional perfusion (NRP) and abdominal NRP; (2) provide guidelines for the standards of practice that should govern thoracoabdominal NRP and abdominal NRP; and (3) develop and implement a central database for the collection of NRP donor and recipient data in the United States. National and international leaders in the fields of neuroscience, transplantation, critical care, NRP, Organ Procurement Organizations, transplant centers, and donor families participated. The conference was designed to focus on the controversial issues of neurological flow and function in donation after circulatory death donors during NRP and propose technical standards necessary to ensure that this procedure is performed safely and effectively. This article discusses major topics and conclusions addressed at the meeting.

Objective: To characterize the current state of mental health within the surgical workforce in the United States. Background: Mental illness and suicide is a growing concern in the medical community; however, the current state is largely unknown. Methods: Cross-sectional survey of the academic surgery community assessing mental health, medical error, and suicidal ideation. The odds of suicidal ideation adjusting for sex, prior mental health diagnosis, and validated scales screening for depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and alcohol use disorder were assessed. Results: Of 622 participating medical students, trainees, and surgeons (estimated response rate=11.4%–14.0%), 26.1% (141/539) reported a previous mental health diagnosis. In all, 15.9% (83/523) of respondents screened positive for current depression, 18.4% (98/533) for anxiety, 11.0% (56/510) for alcohol use disorder, and 17.3% (36/208) for PTSD. Medical error was associated with depression (30.7% vs. 13.3%, P<0.001), anxiety (31.6% vs. 16.2%, P=0.001), PTSD (12.8% vs. 5.6%, P=0.018), and hazardous alcohol consumption (18.7% vs. 9.7%, P=0.022). Overall, 13.2% (73/551) of respondents reported suicidal ideation in the past year and 9.6% (51/533) in the past 2 weeks. On adjusted analysis, a previous history of a mental health disorder (aOR: 1.97, 95% CI: 1.04–3.65, P=0.033) and screening positive for depression (aOR: 4.30, 95% CI: 2.21–8.29, P<0.001) or PTSD (aOR: 3.93, 95% CI: 1.61–9.44, P=0.002) were associated with increased odds of suicidal ideation over the past 12 months. Conclusions: Nearly 1 in 7 respondents reported suicidal ideation in the past year. Mental illness and suicidal ideation are significant problems among the surgical workforce in the United States.

Liver transplantation (LT) for alcohol associated hepatitis (AH) remains controversial. We convened a consensus conference to examine various aspects of LT for AH. The goal was not to unequivocally endorse LT for AH; instead, it was to propose recommendations for programs that perform or plan to perform LT for AH. Criteria were established to determine candidacy for LT in the setting of AH and included the following: (1) AH patients presenting for the first time with decompensated liver disease that are nonresponders to medical therapy without severe medical or psychiatric comorbidities; (2) a fixed period of abstinence prior to transplantation is not required; and (3) assessment with a multidisciplinary psychosocial team, including a social worker and an addiction specialist/mental health professional with addiction and transplantation expertise. Supporting factors included lack of repeated unsuccessful attempts at addiction rehabilitation, lack of other substance use/dependency, acceptance of diagnosis/insight with a commitment of the patient/family to sobriety, and formalized agreement to adhere to total alcohol abstinence and counseling. LT should be avoided in AH patients who are likely to spontaneously recover. Short‐term and longterm survival comparable to other indications for LT must be achieved. There should not be further disparity in LT either by indication, geography, or other sociodemographic factors. Treatment of alcohol‐use disorders should be incorporated into pre‐ and post‐LT care. The restrictive and focused evaluation process described in the initial LT experience for AH worldwide may not endure as this indication gains wider acceptance at more LT programs. Transparency in the selection process is crucial and requires the collection of objective data to assess outcomes and minimize center variation in listing. Oversight of program adherence is important to harmonize listing practices and outcomes.