Citations

AbstractBackgroundDecisions to transplant organs from severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) nucleic acid test‐positive (NAT+) donors must balance risk of donor‐derived transmission events (DDTE) with the scarcity of available organs.MethodsOrgan Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) data were used to compare organ utilization and recipient outcomes between SARS‐CoV‐2 NAT+ and NAT– donors. NAT+ was defined by either a positive upper or lower respiratory tract (LRT) sample within 21 days of procurement. Potential DDTE were adjudicated by OPTN Disease Transmission Advisory Committee.ResultsFrom May 27, 2021 (date of OTPN policy for required LRT testing of lung donors) to January 31, 2022, organs were recovered from 617 NAT+ donors from all OPTN regions and 53 of 57 (93%) organ procurement organizations. NAT+ donors were younger and had higher organ quality scores for kidney and liver. Organ utilization was lower for NAT+ donors compared to NAT– donors. A total of 1241 organs (776 kidneys, 316 livers, 106 hearts, 22 lungs, and 21 other) were transplanted from 514 NAT+ donors compared to 21 946 organs from 8853 NAT– donors. Medical urgency was lower for recipients of NAT+ liver and heart transplants. The median waitlist time was longer for liver recipients of NAT+ donors. The match run sequence number for final acceptor was higher for NAT+ donors for all organ types. Outcomes for hospital length of stay, 30‐day mortality, and 30‐day graft loss were similar for all organ types. No SARS‐CoV‐2 DDTE occurred in this interval.ConclusionsTransplantation of SARS‐CoV‐2 NAT+ donor organs appears safe for short‐term outcomes of death and graft loss and ameliorates the organ shortage. Further study is required to assure comparable longer term outcomes. image

AbstractBackgroundResilience represents the capacity to adapt to adversity. Resilience can improve following behavioral interventions. We examined lung transplant candidates’ resilience as a novel predictor using the Connor‐Davidson Resilience Scale (RISC‐10).MethodsWaitlisted candidates at six centers were mailed questionnaires from 9/16/2015 to 10/1/2019. Follow‐up surveys were collected annually and post‐transplant. Outcomes were recorded through February 17, 2020. Primary outcome was pre‐transplant death/delisting. Analyses included t test or chi‐square for group comparisons, Pearson's correlation coefficients for strength of relationships, and Cox proportional‐hazard models to evaluate associations with outcomes, adjusting for age, sex, and mood.ResultsParticipation was 55.3% (N = 199). Baseline RISC‐10 averaged 32.0 ± 5.6 and did not differ by demographics, primary transplant diagnosis, or disease severity markers. RISC‐10 did not correlate to the commonly utilized Psychosocial Assessment of Candidates for Transplant [PACT] or Stanford Integrated Psychosocial Assessment for Transplantation [SIPAT] tools. Scores < 26.3 (representing > 1 standard deviation below population average) occurred in 16% and were associated with pre‐transplant death or delisting, adjusted Hazard Ratio of 2.60 (95% Confidence Interval 1.23‐5.77; P = .01).ConclusionOne in six lung candidates had low resilience, predicting increased pre‐transplant death/delisting. RISC‐10 did not correlate with PACT or SIPAT; resilience may represent a novel risk factor.

Importance Black individuals are more likely than white individuals to develop dementia. Whether higher blood pressure (BP) levels in black individuals explain differences between black and white individuals in dementia risk is uncertain. Objective To determine whether cumulative BP levels explain racial differences in cognitive decline. Design, Setting, and Participants Individual participant data from 5 cohorts (January 1971 to December 2017) were pooled from the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities Study, Coronary Artery Risk Development in Young Adults Study, Cardiovascular Health Study, Framingham Offspring Study, and Northern Manhattan Study. Outcomes were standardized as t scores (mean [SD], 50 [10]); a 1-point difference represented a 0.1-SD difference in cognition. The median (interquartile range) follow-up was 12.4 (5.9-21.0) years. Analysis began September 2018. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was change in global cognition, and secondary outcomes were change in memory and executive function. Exposures Race (black vs white). Results Among 34 349 participants, 19 378 individuals who were free of stroke and dementia and had longitudinal BP, cognitive, and covariate data were included in the analysis. The mean (SD) age at first cognitive assessment was 59.8 (10.4) years and ranged from 5 to 95 years. Of 19 378 individuals, 10 724 (55.3%) were female and 15 526 (80.1%) were white. Compared with white individuals, black individuals had significantly faster declines in global cognition (−0.03 points per year faster [95% CI, −0.05 to −0.01]; P = .004) and memory (−0.08 points per year faster [95% CI, −0.11 to −0.06]; P &amp;lt; .001) but significantly slower declines in executive function (0.09 points per year slower [95% CI, 0.08-0.10]; P &amp;lt; .001). Time-dependent cumulative mean systolic BP level was associated with significantly faster declines in global cognition (−0.018 points per year faster per each 10–mm Hg increase [95% CI, −0.023 to −0.014]; P &amp;lt; .001), memory (−0.028 points per year faster per each 10–mm Hg increase [95% CI, −0.035 to −0.021]; P &amp;lt; .001), and executive function (−0.01 points per year faster per each 10–mm Hg increase [95% CI, −0.014 to −0.007]; P &amp;lt; .001). After adjusting for cumulative mean systolic BP, differences between black and white individuals in cognitive slopes were attenuated for global cognition (−0.01 points per year [95% CI, −0.03 to 0.01]; P = .56) and memory (−0.06 points per year [95% CI, −0.08 to −0.03]; P &amp;lt; .001) but not executive function (0.10 points per year [95% CI, 0.09-0.11]; P &amp;lt; .001). Conclusions and Relevance These results suggest that black individuals’ higher cumulative BP levels may contribute to racial differences in later-life cognitive decline.

Background: We examined the association of adult lung transplant candidates’ self-reported affect with transplant-related outcomes, evaluating whether a positive (vs negative) frame of mind might be protective. Method: Consenting waitlisted candidates from 6 centers completed the questionnaires including the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule annually and posttransplant. Univariate logistic regression analysis was performed to determine the association of baseline affect with outcomes of death or delisting. Models were subsequently adjusted for age, marital status, and education. Results: Questionnaires were completed by 169 candidates (77.9% participation). Mean positive affect, negative affect, and positive-to-negative affect ratio (positivity ratio) were similar to expected norms. The scores of the questionnaire did not change significantly over time. Fifteen (8.9%) waitlisted participants died. Candidates who died while waiting had lower positivity ratios compared to those who survived (1.82 vs 2.45; P = .02). A more negative affect was associated with increased death on the waiting list (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.10; P = .021). Conversely, a higher positivity ratio was associated with decreased death while waiting (adjusted OR: 0.45; P = .027). Conclusion: Negative affect may represent a novel risk factor for death on the waitlist. Enhancing positive affect may represent a useful target for psychological optimization in lung transplant candidates.

OBJECTIVE Given temporal changes in diabetes prevalence and stroke incidence, this study investigated age, race, and sex differences in the diabetes–stroke association in a contemporary prospective cohort, the REasons for Geographic and Racial Differences in Stroke (REGARDS) Study. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS We included 23,002 non-Hispanic black and white U.S. adults aged ≥45 years without prevalent stroke at baseline (2003–2007). Diabetes was defined as fasting glucose ≥126 mg/dL, random glucose ≥200 mg/dL, or use of glucose-lowering medication. Incident stroke events were expert adjudicated and available through September 2017. RESULTS The prevalence of diabetes was 19.1% at baseline. During follow-up, 1,018 stroke events occurred. Among adults aged &lt;65 years, comparing those with diabetes to those without diabetes, the risk of stroke was increased for white women (hazard ratio [HR] 3.72 [95% CI 2.10–6.57]), black women (HR 1.88 [95% CI 1.22–2.90]), and white men (HR 2.01 [95% CI 1.27–3.27]) but not black men (HR 1.27 [95% CI 0.77–2.10]) after multivariable adjustment. Among those aged ≥65 years, diabetes increased the risk of stroke for white women and black men, but not black women (HR 1.05 [95% CI 0.74–1.48]) or white men (HR 0.86 [95% CI 0.62–1.21]). CONCLUSIONS In this contemporary cohort, the diabetes–stroke association varied by age, race, and sex together, with a more pronounced effect observed among adults aged &lt;65 years. With the recent increase in the burden of diabetes complications at younger ages in the U.S., additional efforts are needed earlier in life for stroke prevention among adults with diabetes.

Section editor's note: Welcome to a new section in Advances titled “Pulmonary Hypertension Grand Rounds” (PHGR), which we are introducing in this issue. With this addition, Advances offers a unique opportunity for trainees and junior faculty interested in pulmonary hypertension (PH). This section will highlight cases with literature reviews written by young clinicians and researchers in PH. PHGR was created to use patient cases to integrate individual clinical expertise with the best available evidence from the literature to enable the best decisions for patients. As with the rest of the journal, our audience continues to be physicians, researchers, nurses, students, residents, and fellows interested in both the care of individual patients and the advances in our field. We welcome comments about the section and inquiries regarding submitting a case for publication. Please direct inquiries to advancesgrandrounds@PHAssociation.org