Regional differences in recipient waitlist time and pre- and post-transplant mortality after the 2006 United Network for Organ Sharing policy changes in the donor heart allocation algorithm.

This study examined the impact of the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) policy changes for regional differences in waitlist time and mortality before and after heart transplantation. The 2006 UNOS thoracic organ allocation policy change was implemented to allow for greater regional sharing of organs for heart transplantation. We analyzed 36,789 patients who were listed for heart transplantation from January 1999 through April 2012. These patients were separated into 2 eras centered on the July 12, 2006 UNOS policy change. Pre- and post-transplantation characteristics were compared by UNOS regions. Waitlist mortality decreased nationally (up to 180 days: 13.3% vs. 7.9% after the UNOS policy change, p < 0.001) and within each region. Similarly, 2-year post-transplant mortality decreased nationally (2-year mortality: 17.3% vs. 14.6%; p < 0.001) as well as regionally. Waitlist time for UNOS status 1A and 1B candidates increased nationally 17.8 days on average (p < 0.001) with variability between the regions. The greatest increases were in Region 9 (59.2-day increase, p < 0.001) and Region 4 (41.2-day increase, p < 0.001). Although the use of mechanical circulatory support increased nearly 2.3-fold nationally in Era 2, significant differences were present on a regional basis. In Regions 6, 7, and 10, nearly 40% of those transplanted required left ventricular assist device bridging, whereas only 19.6%, 22.3%, and 15.5% required a left ventricular assist device in regions 3, 4, and 5, respectively. The 2006 UNOS policy change has resulted in significant regional heterogeneity with respect to waitlist time and reliance on mechanical circulatory support as a bridge to transplantation, although overall both waitlist mortality and post-transplant survival are improved.

Schulze PC ，Kitada S ，Clerkin K ，Jin Z ，Mancini DM ... -  《-》

Morbidity and mortality in heart transplant candidates supported with mechanical circulatory support: is reappraisal of the current United network for organ sharing thoracic organ allocation policy justified?

Wever-Pinzon O ，Drakos SG ，Kfoury AG ，Nativi JN ，Gilbert EM ，Everitt M ，Alharethi R ，Brunisholz K ，Bader FM ，Li DY ，Selzman CH ，Stehlik J ... -  《-》

Three-Year Left Ventricular Assist Device Outcomes and Strategy After Heart Transplant Allocation Score Change.

The United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) adopted new criteria for the heart allocation score on October 18, 2018 to reflect the changing trends of candidates' mortality while awaiting transplant. We examined the impact of these policy changes on rates of left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation and outcomes after transplant from a relatively newer UNOS database. The UNOS registry was used to identify first-time adult heart recipients with LVAD at listing or transplant who underwent transplantation between January 1, 2016 and March 10, 2020. Survival data were collected through March 30, 2023. Those listed before October 18, 2018 but transplanted after were excluded. Patients were divided into before or after change groups. Demographics and clinical parameters were compared. Survival was analyzed with Kaplan-Meier curves and log-rank tests. A p <0.05 was considered significant. We identified 4,387 heart recipients with LVAD in the before (n = 3,606) and after (n = 781) score change eras. The after group had a lower rate of LVAD implantation while listed than the before group (20.4% vs 34.9%, p <0.0001), and were more likely to be female (25.1% vs 20.2%, p = 0.002); in both groups, most recipients (62.8%) were white. There was significantly farther distance from the donor hospital to transplant center in the after group (264.4 NM vs 144.2 NM, p <0.0001) and decreased waitlist days (84.9 ± 105.1 vs 369.2 ± 459.5, p <0.0001). Recipients in the after group were more likely to use extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (3.7% vs 0.5%, p <0.0001) and intravenous inotropes (19.1% vs 7.5%, p <0.0001) and receive a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention increased risk donor organ (37.9% vs 30.5%, p <0.0001). Survival at 3 years was comparable between the 2 groups. The allocation score change in 2018 yielded considerable changes in mechanical circulatory support device implantation strategy and outcomes. The rate of LVAD implantation decreased with increased utilization of temporary mechanical circulatory support devices.

Agronin J ，Brown M ，Calvelli H ，Zhao H ，Rakita V ，Toyoda Y ，Kashem MA ... -  《-》

Impact of the 2016 revision of US Pediatric Heart Allocation Policy on waitlist characteristics and outcomes.

US Pediatric Heart Allocation Policy was recently revised, deprioritizing candidates with cardiomyopathy while maintaining status 1A eligibility for congenital heart disease (CHD) candidates on "high-dose" inotropes. We compared waitlist characteristics and mortality around this change. Status 1A listings decreased (70% to 56%, P < .001) and CHD representation increased among status 1A listings (48% vs 64%, P < .001). Waitlist mortality overall (subdistribution hazard ratio [SHR] 0.96, P = .63) and among status 1A candidates (SHR 1.16, P = .14) were unchanged. CHD waitlist mortality trended better (SHR 0.82, P = .06) but was unchanged for CHD candidates listed status 1A (SHR 0.92, P = .47). Status 1A listing exceptions increased 2- to 3-fold among hypertrophic and restrictive cardiomyopathy candidates and 13.5-fold among dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) candidates. Hypertrophic (SHR 6.25, P = .004) and restrictive (SHR 3.87, P = .03) cardiomyopathy candidates without status 1A exception had increased waitlist mortality, but those with DCM did not (SHR 1.26, P = .32). Ventricular assist device (VAD) use increased only among DCM candidates ≥1 years old (26% vs 38%, P < .001). Current allocation policy has increased CHD status 1A representation but has not improved their waitlist mortality. Excessive DCM status 1A listing exceptions and continued status 1A prioritization of children on stable VADs potentially diminish the intended benefits of policy revision.

Magnetta DA ，Godown J ，West S ，Zinn M ，Rose-Felker K ，Miller S ，Feingold B ... -  《-》

Changes in Use of Left Ventricular Assist Devices as Bridge to Transplantation With New Heart Allocation Policy.

The goal of this study was to describe outcomes of patients with bridge to heart transplantation (BTT) after changes were made to the donor heart allocation system. Left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) have been used as a BTT. On October 18, 2018, the donor heart allocation system in the United States was updated. This study identified adults in the United Network for Organ Sharing database with durable, continuous-flow LVAD at listing or implanted while listed between April 2017 and April 2020. Baseline recipient and donor characteristics, waitlist survival, and post-transplantation outcomes were compared pre- and post-allocation system change. A total of 1,794 patients met inclusion criteria: 983 in the pre-change period and 814 afterward. The number of patients listed with LVAD decreased nationally over time from 102 in April 2017 to 12 in April 2020 (p < 0.001). The proportion of patients with LVAD at time of transplant decreased from 47% to 14%. Before the change, the majority were Status 1A (75.8%) at transplantation; afterward, most were Status 2/3 (67.8%). Transplantation rates were not different (85.4% vs. 83.6%; p = 0.225), but waitlist time decreased in the post period (82 vs. 65 days; p = 0.004). Donors were more likely to be high risk (39.0% vs. 32.2%; p = 0.005), and both ischemic times and distance traveled increased (3.4 h vs. 3.1 h; p < 0.001; 199 miles vs. 82 miles; p < 0.001). Waitlist survival did not change, but post-transplantation survival was worse in patients with BTT post-change (p < 0.001). The number of patients with BTT on the transplant list decreased steadily and dramatically after the allocation system change. Although time to transplant decreased, there was an increase in post-transplant mortality. These data suggest that the risks and benefits of LVAD implantation as a BTT have changed under the new allocation system and that the appropriate indication for this treatment strategy warrants a re-evaluation.

Mullan CW ，Chouairi F ，Sen S ，Mori M ，Clark KAA ，Reinhardt SW ，Miller PE ，Fuery MA ，Jacoby D ，Maulion C ，Anwer M ，Geirsson A ，Mulligan D ，Formica R ，Rogers JG ，Desai NR ，Ahmad T ... -  《-》