Krishna Bhandari, Khaled Shorbaji, Akinwale Victor Famotire, Brett Welch, Lucas Witer, Nicolas Pope, Arman Kilic
{"title":"心脏移植中远距离供体中心水平利用的演变变化。","authors":"Krishna Bhandari, Khaled Shorbaji, Akinwale Victor Famotire, Brett Welch, Lucas Witer, Nicolas Pope, Arman Kilic","doi":"10.1093/icvts/ivaf190","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This study evaluates changes in centre-level utilization of longer distance donors (LDD) in heart transplantation (HT) before and after the allocation policy change in 2018.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Adult HT recipients from 2010 to 2023 were identified from the United Network for Organ Sharing registry. Patients were categorized based on donor centre distance and policy change. The Mann-Kendall trend test was utilized for trend analysis. A propensity-matched analysis was performed. Survival analyses were performed using Kaplan-Meier, restricted mean survival time, and multivariable Cox proportional models. Interaction analysis with Bonferroni correction and sensitivity analysis to test the robustness of primary findings were performed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 32 036 recipients from 152 centres, 29 410 from ≤500 miles and 2626 from >500 miles. The mean distance increased from 171 miles to 288 (P < .001) and mean cold ischaemia time from 3.20 to 3.60 h (P < .001) after allocation change. The proportion of recipients with LDD increased from 5.50% in 2010 to 14.00% in 2022, P = .021. In the unmatched cohort, unadjusted 30-day, 1-year, and 5-year survival was comparable between LDD and non-LDD recipients (P > .05). However, risk-adjusted survival in the matched cohort was significantly better with LDD: 30-day (0.60, 0.43-0.82, P = .002), 1-year (0.67, 0.55-0.82, P < .001), and 5-y (0.75, 0.65-0.86, P < .001). Similar findings persisted even after restricted mean survival time analysis. There was a weak correlation between distance and ischaemia time in the matched cohort (r = 0.19).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>There has been a substantial increase in the use of LDD following the allocation change. Distance is not a surrogate for ischaemia time. Survival after HT with LDD use is significantly better compared to non-LDD, but further research is warranted.</p>","PeriodicalId":73406,"journal":{"name":"Interdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12396783/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evolving Changes in Centre-Level Utilization of Longer Distance Donors in Heart Transplantation.\",\"authors\":\"Krishna Bhandari, Khaled Shorbaji, Akinwale Victor Famotire, Brett Welch, Lucas Witer, Nicolas Pope, Arman Kilic\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/icvts/ivaf190\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This study evaluates changes in centre-level utilization of longer distance donors (LDD) in heart transplantation (HT) before and after the allocation policy change in 2018.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Adult HT recipients from 2010 to 2023 were identified from the United Network for Organ Sharing registry. Patients were categorized based on donor centre distance and policy change. The Mann-Kendall trend test was utilized for trend analysis. A propensity-matched analysis was performed. Survival analyses were performed using Kaplan-Meier, restricted mean survival time, and multivariable Cox proportional models. Interaction analysis with Bonferroni correction and sensitivity analysis to test the robustness of primary findings were performed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 32 036 recipients from 152 centres, 29 410 from ≤500 miles and 2626 from >500 miles. The mean distance increased from 171 miles to 288 (P < .001) and mean cold ischaemia time from 3.20 to 3.60 h (P < .001) after allocation change. The proportion of recipients with LDD increased from 5.50% in 2010 to 14.00% in 2022, P = .021. In the unmatched cohort, unadjusted 30-day, 1-year, and 5-year survival was comparable between LDD and non-LDD recipients (P > .05). However, risk-adjusted survival in the matched cohort was significantly better with LDD: 30-day (0.60, 0.43-0.82, P = .002), 1-year (0.67, 0.55-0.82, P < .001), and 5-y (0.75, 0.65-0.86, P < .001). Similar findings persisted even after restricted mean survival time analysis. There was a weak correlation between distance and ischaemia time in the matched cohort (r = 0.19).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>There has been a substantial increase in the use of LDD following the allocation change. Distance is not a surrogate for ischaemia time. Survival after HT with LDD use is significantly better compared to non-LDD, but further research is warranted.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73406,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Interdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12396783/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Interdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/icvts/ivaf190\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Interdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/icvts/ivaf190","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Evolving Changes in Centre-Level Utilization of Longer Distance Donors in Heart Transplantation.
Objectives: This study evaluates changes in centre-level utilization of longer distance donors (LDD) in heart transplantation (HT) before and after the allocation policy change in 2018.
Methods: Adult HT recipients from 2010 to 2023 were identified from the United Network for Organ Sharing registry. Patients were categorized based on donor centre distance and policy change. The Mann-Kendall trend test was utilized for trend analysis. A propensity-matched analysis was performed. Survival analyses were performed using Kaplan-Meier, restricted mean survival time, and multivariable Cox proportional models. Interaction analysis with Bonferroni correction and sensitivity analysis to test the robustness of primary findings were performed.
Results: Among 32 036 recipients from 152 centres, 29 410 from ≤500 miles and 2626 from >500 miles. The mean distance increased from 171 miles to 288 (P < .001) and mean cold ischaemia time from 3.20 to 3.60 h (P < .001) after allocation change. The proportion of recipients with LDD increased from 5.50% in 2010 to 14.00% in 2022, P = .021. In the unmatched cohort, unadjusted 30-day, 1-year, and 5-year survival was comparable between LDD and non-LDD recipients (P > .05). However, risk-adjusted survival in the matched cohort was significantly better with LDD: 30-day (0.60, 0.43-0.82, P = .002), 1-year (0.67, 0.55-0.82, P < .001), and 5-y (0.75, 0.65-0.86, P < .001). Similar findings persisted even after restricted mean survival time analysis. There was a weak correlation between distance and ischaemia time in the matched cohort (r = 0.19).
Conclusions: There has been a substantial increase in the use of LDD following the allocation change. Distance is not a surrogate for ischaemia time. Survival after HT with LDD use is significantly better compared to non-LDD, but further research is warranted.