William F Parker1, Kevin Chung2, Allen S Anderson3, Mark Siegler4, Elbert S Huang5, Matthew M Churpek6. 1. Department of Medicine, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois; MacLean Center for Clinical Medical Ethics, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois. Electronic address: william.parker@uchospitals.edu. 2. Pritzker School of Medicine, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois. 3. Department of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago Illinois. 4. MacLean Center for Clinical Medical Ethics, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois. 5. Department of Medicine, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois; MacLean Center for Clinical Medical Ethics, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois. 6. Department of Medicine, Wisconsin University, Madison, Wisconsin.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In October 2018, the U.S. heart allocation system expanded the number of priority "status" tiers from 3 to 6 and added cardiogenic shock requirements for some heart transplant candidates listed with specific types of treatments. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to determine the impact of the new policy on the treatment practices of transplant centers. METHODS: Initial listing data on all adult heart candidates listed from December 1, 2017 to April 30, 2019 were collected from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients. The status-qualifying treatments (or exception requests) and hemodynamic values at listing of a post-policy cohort (December 2018 to April 2019) were compared with a seasonally matched pre-policy cohort (December 2017 to April 2018). Candidates in the pre-policy cohort were reclassified into the new priority system statuses by using treatment, diagnosis, and hemodynamics. RESULTS: Comparing the post-policy cohort (N = 1,567) with the pre-policy cohort (N = 1,606), there were significant increases in listings with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (+1.2%), intra-aortic balloon pumps (+ 4 %), and exceptions (+ 12%). Listings with low-dose inotropes (-18%) and high-dose inotropes (-3%) significantly decreased. The new priority status distribution had more status 2 (+14%) candidates than expected and fewer status 3 (-5%), status 4 (- 4%) and status 6 (-8%) candidates than expected (p values <0.01 for all comparisons). CONCLUSIONS: After implementation of the new heart allocation policy, transplant centers listed more candidates with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, intra-aortic balloon pumps, and exception requests and fewer candidates with inotrope therapy than expected, thus leading to significantly more high-priority status listings than anticipated. If these early trends persist, the new allocation system may not function as intended.
BACKGROUND: In October 2018, the U.S. heart allocation system expanded the number of priority "status" tiers from 3 to 6 and added cardiogenic shock requirements for some heart transplant candidates listed with specific types of treatments. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to determine the impact of the new policy on the treatment practices of transplant centers. METHODS: Initial listing data on all adult heart candidates listed from December 1, 2017 to April 30, 2019 were collected from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients. The status-qualifying treatments (or exception requests) and hemodynamic values at listing of a post-policy cohort (December 2018 to April 2019) were compared with a seasonally matched pre-policy cohort (December 2017 to April 2018). Candidates in the pre-policy cohort were reclassified into the new priority system statuses by using treatment, diagnosis, and hemodynamics. RESULTS: Comparing the post-policy cohort (N = 1,567) with the pre-policy cohort (N = 1,606), there were significant increases in listings with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (+1.2%), intra-aortic balloon pumps (+ 4 %), and exceptions (+ 12%). Listings with low-dose inotropes (-18%) and high-dose inotropes (-3%) significantly decreased. The new priority status distribution had more status 2 (+14%) candidates than expected and fewer status 3 (-5%), status 4 (- 4%) and status 6 (-8%) candidates than expected (p values <0.01 for all comparisons). CONCLUSIONS: After implementation of the new heart allocation policy, transplant centers listed more candidates with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, intra-aortic balloon pumps, and exception requests and fewer candidates with inotrope therapy than expected, thus leading to significantly more high-priority status listings than anticipated. If these early trends persist, the new allocation system may not function as intended.
Authors: Jose N Nativi; Abdallah G Kfoury; Craig Myrick; Melissa Peters; Dale Renlund; Edward M Gilbert; Feras Bader; Arun K Singhal; Melanie Everitt; Patrick Fisher; David A Bull; Craig Selzman; Josef Stehlik Journal: J Heart Lung Transplant Date: 2009-09-26 Impact factor: 10.247
Authors: M Colvin; J M Smith; N Hadley; M A Skeans; K Uccellini; R Lehman; A M Robinson; A K Israni; J J Snyder; B L Kasiske Journal: Am J Transplant Date: 2019-02 Impact factor: 8.086
Authors: William F Parker; Allen S Anderson; Donald Hedeker; Elbert S Huang; Edward R Garrity; Mark Siegler; Matthew M Churpek Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2018-04-24 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: William F Parker; Allen S Anderson; Robert D Gibbons; Edward R Garrity; Lainie F Ross; Elbert S Huang; Matthew M Churpek Journal: JAMA Date: 2019-11-12 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Jan M Griffin; Ersilia M DeFilippis; Hannah Rosenblum; Veli K Topkara; Justin A Fried; Nir Uriel; Koji Takeda; Maryjane A Farr; Mathew S Maurer; Kevin J Clerkin Journal: Clin Transplant Date: 2020-10-28 Impact factor: 2.863
Authors: Gege Ran; Kevin Chung; Allen S Anderson; Robert D Gibbons; Nikhil Narang; Matthew M Churpek; William F Parker Journal: Am J Transplant Date: 2021-05-05 Impact factor: 8.086
Authors: Alice L Zhou; Eric W Etchill; Katherine A Giuliano; Benjamin L Shou; Kavita Sharma; Chun W Choi; Ahmet Kilic Journal: J Thorac Dis Date: 2021-12 Impact factor: 2.895
Authors: Katherine Giuliano; Paul Scheel; Eric Etchill; Charles D Fraser; Alejandro Suarez-Pierre; Steven Hsu; Ilan S Wittstein; Edward K Kasper; Roberta Florido; Harikrishna Tandri; Hugh Calkins; Chun W Choi; Kavita Sharma; Ahmet Kilic; Nisha A Gilotra Journal: ESC Heart Fail Date: 2022-02-08
Authors: Veli K Topkara; Kevin J Clerkin; Justin A Fried; Jan Griffin; Jayant Raikhelkar; Sun Hi Lee; Farhana Latif; Marlena Habal; Evelyn Horn; Maryjane A Farr; Koji Takada; Yoshifumi Naka; Ulrich P Jorde; Gabriel Sayer; Nir Uriel Journal: Circ Heart Fail Date: 2021-05-28 Impact factor: 10.447