BackgroundThe 2018 United Network for Organ Sharing organ allocation change aimed to distribute donor hearts to the sickest patients on the waitlist. Whether this change differentially affected outcomes in heart-only versus heart-kidney transplant recipients is unknown.MethodsThis study used the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients to compare outcomes, including survival, of heart-only and heart-kidney transplant recipients from 2015 and 2021, from the old vs new allocation system, including use of mechanical circulatory support (MCS), prior to transplant.ResultsDuring the study period, 16,696 patients underwent heart transplant alone (9,320 in the old and 7,376 in the new system) and 1,156 patients underwent heart-kidney transplant (529 in the old and 627 in the new system). For both heart and heart-kidney transplant populations, there was a 3-5-fold increase in the use of temporary MCS. Heart-only recipients had worse survival when temporary MCS was used in the old allocation system. Heart-only recipients with durable MCS had worse survival both in the old and the new allocation system. There was no difference in survival in heart-kidney recipients in the old verses new allocation system, regardless of MCS use.ConclusionsThe new heart allocation system was associated with increased use of temporary MCS in both heart and heart-kidney recipients. However, this change only differentially affected survival in heart-only recipients with improved survival if on temporary MCS, but worse survival if on durable MCS. Unlike prior studies, heart-kidney recipients did not have different outcomes after the heart allocation change, which may reflect outcomes in more current times.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Merlo et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: