Progress in Transplantation

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is characterized by thrombocytopenia and potential for thromboembolism. Lung transplant recipients are at risk of developing HIT due to heparin exposure peritransplant. We describe the incidence and impact of HIT in lung transplant recipient index hospital length of stay and survival.

A retrospective cohort was obtained from electronic medical records which were queried for all recipients treated with bivalirudin (institutional treatment of choice for HIT) between January 1, 2005, and February 16, 2017 (N = 1171). Patients who developed HIT >30 days after transplant or after their index transplant admission were excluded. A diagnostic algorithm was used retrospectively to determine clinical HIT with an intermediate or high pretest clinical suspicion (“4T” score ≥4) and either (1) positive anti-heparin–platelet-factor 4 (HPF4) assay and a positive functional platelet assay or (2) a positive HPF4 assay only, in patients who did not undergo cardiopulmonary bypass.

Among all lung transplant recipients, 2.1% were found to develop HIT in the peritransplant period (N = 25, mean = 88%) with a mean lung allocation score of 50.8 and an incidence of venous thromboembolism of 72%, most upper extremity in location. When matched with historical controls, patients with HIT had a longer overall index hospital length of stay of 43 days (P = .008). There was no difference in short- or long-term survival posttransplant.

Vigilance for the development of HIT in lung transplant recipients is necessary to prevent further morbidity from thromboembolic events. In our cohort, HIT increased hospital length of stay but did not appear to affect recipient survival.

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.

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.

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).

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.

Tests exist for ApoL1 genetic variants to determine whether a potential donor’s kidneys are at increased risk of kidney failure. Variants of the ApoL1 gene associated with increased risk are primarily found in people with West African ancestry. Given uncertainty about clinical implications of ApoL1 test results for living kidney donors and recipients and the lack of uniform guidelines for ApoL1 testing, transplant centers across the United States vary in ApoL1 testing practices.

(1) What approach do transplant centers take to determine whether prospective donors are of West African ancestry? (2)How do transplant centers engage potential donors during the ApoL1 testing process? (3) What do transplant centers identify as concerns and barriers to ApoL1 testing? and (4) What actions do transplant centers take when a potential donor has 2 ApoL1 risk variants?

We explored the current practices of transplant centers by surveying nephrologists and transplant surgeons at transplant centers evaluating the majority of black living donors in the United States.

About half of these transplant centers offered ApoL1 testing. Of those who offered ApoL1 testing, only half involved the donor in decision-making about donation when the donor has 2 risk variants.

Unaddressed differences in the priorities of transplant centers and black living donors may stigmatize black donors and undermine trust in the health-care and organ donation systems. Variation in transplant center testing practices points to the critical need for further research and community engagement to inform the development of guidelines for ApoL1 testing.

The best strategy to increase awareness of and access to living kidney donation remains unknown. To build upon the existing strategies, we developed the Living Donor Navigator program, combining advocacy training of patient advocates with enhanced health-care systems training of patient navigators to address potential living donor concerns during the evaluation process. Herein, we describe a systematic assessment of the delivery and content of the program through focus group discussion.

We conducted focus groups with 9 advocate participants in the Living Donor Navigator program to identify knowledge, skills, and abilities needed for both advocates and navigators. We focused on 2 organizational levels: (1) the participant level or the advocacy training of the advocates and (2) the programmatic level or the support role provided by the navigators and administration of the program.

From 4 common themes (communication, education, support, and commitment), we identified several core competencies and promising practices, at both the participant and programmatic levels. These themes highlighted the potential for several improvements of program content and delivery, the importance of cultural sensitivity among the Living Donor navigators, and the opportunity for informal caregiver support and accountability provided by the program.

These competencies and promising practices represent actionable strategies for content refinement, optimal training of advocates, and engagement of potential living donors through the Living Donor Navigator program. These findings may also assist with program implementation at other transplant centers in the future.

A kidney transplantation requires complex self-care skills and adequate follow-up from health-care providers. Identifying strengths and limitations in different aspects of health literacy (HL) and associated variables are central to being able to improve health care. The objective of this study was to identify core variables associated with independent domains of HL 8 weeks following a kidney transplantation.

A single-center cross-sectional study was conducted, wherein 159 kidney transplant recipients answered the Health Literacy Questionnaire (HLQ). Multivariable linear regression with backward elimination was used to investigate variables possibly associated with the 9 domains of HL.

The transplant recipients had the lowest scores in “appraisal of health information” and “navigating the healthcare system.” The highest scores were found in “feeling understood and supported by health-care providers” and “ability to actively engage with health-care provider.” General perceived self-efficacy, transplant-specific knowledge, and general health were the driving variables in several of the HL domains.

The HLQ provides a more complex picture of strengths and limitations related to HL, as well as important knowledge about vulnerable groups following a kidney transplantation. The study offers an important supplement to the field of HL in kidney transplant care.

Brain death (BD) precipitates cardiac dysfunction impairing the ability to transplant hearts from eligible organ donors. Retrospective studies have suggested that thyroid hormone may enhance myocardial recovery and increase hearts transplanted. We performed a randomized trial evaluating whether intravenous thyroxine (T4) improves cardiac function in BD donors with impaired ejection fraction (EF).

All heart-eligible donors managed at a single-organ procurement organization (OPO) underwent protocolized fluid resuscitation. Those weaned off vasopressors underwent transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) within 12 hours of BD and, if EF was below 60%, were randomized to T4 infusion or no T4 for 8 hours, after which TTE was repeated.

Of 77 heart-eligible donors, 36 were weaned off vasopressors. Ejection fraction was depressed in 30, of whom 28 were randomized to T4 (n = 17) vs control (n = 11). Baseline EF was comparable (45%, interquartile range [IQR] 42.5-47.5 vs 40%, 40-50, P = .32). Ejection fraction did not improve more with T4 (10%, IQR 5-15 vs 5%, 0-12.5, P = .24), although there was a trend to more hearts transplanted (59% vs 27%, P = .14). This difference appeared to be accounted for by more donors with a history of drug use in the T4 group, who exhibited greater improvements in EF (15% vs 0% without drug use, P = .01) and more often had hearts transplanted (12 of 19 vs 1 of 9, P = .01).

In this small randomized study of BD donors with impaired cardiac function, T4 infusion did not result in greater cardiac recovery. A larger randomized trial comparing T4 to placebo appears warranted but would require collaboration across multiple OPOs.

Detailed studies on the associations between religious beliefs and organ donation attitudes among religious minorities remain wanting. Although Muslims appear to have low rates of support for donation, how these behaviors relate to religious frameworks requires further investigation.

We sought to explore the relationship between religious beliefs (Islam) and organ donation attitudes through focus groups with 43 Muslim women from 5 Chicago-area mosques. Purposive selection of mosques generated near-equal representation of Arabs, South Asians, and African Americans, as well as diversity in education and income. Using the theory of planned behavior as our conceptual framework, we expanded the traditional normative domain to include religiously informed beliefs.

We found that the relationship between religious beliefs and Muslim attitudes toward organ donation is more complex than commonly perceived. Regarding the Islamic ethicolegal permissibility of organ donation, participants expressed a range of normative beliefs. Furthermore, participants voiced concerns beyond religious permissibility, including anxieties over modesty violations during the donation process, as well as concerns about purported black market organ trade and medical risks to donors.

Given that participants raised religious, societal, and biomedical concerns regarding organ donation, our findings suggest that effective educational programs should involve nuanced curricula that teach to the plurality of Islamic ethicolegal opinions and discuss transplantation processes within the United States.