Center Volume Is Associated With Outcome After Pancreas Transplantation Within the Eurotransplant Region

Background. Outcome after surgery depends on several factors, among these, the annual volume-outcome relationship. This might also be the case in a highly complex field as pancreas transplantation. No study has investigated this relationship in a European setting. Methods. All consecutive pancreas transplantations from January 2008 until December 2013 were included. Donor-, recipient-, and transplant-related factors were analyzed for their association with patient and graft survivals. Centers were classified in equally sized groups as being low volume (= 13/year). Results. In the study period, 1276 pancreas transplantations were included. Un-adjusted 1-year patient survival was associated with center volume and was best in high volume centers, compared with medium and low volume: 96.5%, 94% and 92.3%, respectively (P = 0.017). Pancreas donor risk index (PDRI) was highest in high volume centers: 1.38 versus 1.21 in medium and 1.25 in low volume centers (P < 0.001). Pancreas graft survival at 1 year did not differ significantly between volume categories: 86%, 83.2%, and 81.6%, respectively (P = 0.114). After multivariate Cox-regression analysis, higher PDRI (hazard ratio [HR], 1.60;P < 0.001), retransplantation (HR, 1.91;P = 0.002), and higher recipient body mass index (HR, 1.04;P = 0.024) were risk factors for pancreas graft failure. High center volume was protective for graft failure (HR, 0.70;P = 0.037) compared with low center volume. Conclusion. Patient and graft survival after pancreas transplantation are superior in higher volume centers. High volume centers have good results, even though they transplant organs with the highest PDRI

Speed, Variability, and Timing of Motor Output in ADHD: Which Measures are Useful for Endophenotypic Research?

Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) shares a genetic basis with motor coordination problems and probably motor timing problems. In line with this, comparable problems in motor timing should be observed in first degree relatives and might, therefore, form a suitable endophenotypic candidate. This hypothesis was investigated in 238 ADHD-families (545 children) and 147 control-families (271 children). A motor timing task was administered, in which children had to produce a 1,000 ms interval. In addition to this task, two basic motor tasks were administered to examine speed and variability of motor output, when no timing component was required. Results indicated that variability in motor timing is a useful endophenotypic candidate: It was clearly associated with ADHD, it was also present in non-affected siblings, and it correlated within families. Accuracy (under- versus over-production) in motor timing appeared less useful: Even though accuracy was associated with ADHD (probands and affected siblings had a tendency to under-produce the 1,000 ms interval compared to controls), non-affected siblings did not differ from controls and sibling correlations were only marginally significant. Slow and variable motor output without timing component also appears present in ADHD, but not in non-affected siblings, suggesting these deficits not to be related to a familial vulnerability for ADHD. Deficits in motor timing could not be explained by deficits already present in basic motor output without a timing component. This suggests abnormalities in motor timing were predominantly related to deficient motor timing processes and not to general deficient motor functioning. The finding that deficits in motor timing run in ADHD-families suggests this to be a fruitful domain for further exploration in relation to the genetic underpinnings of ADHD

Does kidney transplantation with a standard or expanded criteria donor improve patient survival? Results from a Belgian cohort

BACKGROUND: Changes in recipient and donor factors have reopened the question of survival benefits of kidney transplantation versus dialysis. METHODS: We analysed survival among 3808 adult Belgian patients waitlisted for a first deceased donor kidney transplant from 2000 to 2012. The primary outcome was mortality during the median waiting time plus 3 years of follow-up after transplantation or with continued dialysis. Outcomes were analysed separately for standard criteria donor (SCD) and expanded criteria donor (ECD) kidney transplants. We adjusted survival analyses for recipient age (20-44, 45-64 and ≥65 years), sex and diabetes as the primary renal disease. RESULTS: Among patients ≥65 years of age, only SCD transplantation provided a significant survival benefit compared with dialysis, with a mortality of 16.3% [95% confidence interval (CI) 13.2-19.9] with SCD transplantation, 20.5% (95% CI 16.1-24.6) with ECD transplantation and 24.6% (95% CI 19.4-29.5) with continued dialysis. Relative mortality risk was increased in the first months after transplantation compared with dialysis, with equivalent risk levels reached earlier with SCD than ECD transplantation in all age groups. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study suggest that older patients might gain a survival benefit with SCD transplantation versus dialysis, but any survival benefit with ECD transplantation versus dialysis may be small

Does kidney transplantation with a standard or expanded criteria donor improve patient survival?

Changes in recipient and donor factors have reopened the question of survival benefits with kidney transplantation versus dialysis. We analyzed survival among 3808 adult Belgian patients waitlisted for a first deceased donor kidney transplant from 2000 to 2012. The primary outcome was mortality during the median waiting time plus 3 years of follow-up after transplantation or with continued dialysis. Outcomes were analyzed separately for standard criteria donor (SCD) and expanded criteria donor (ECD) kidney transplants. We adjusted survival analyses for recipient age (20-44 y, 45-64 y, ≥65 y), sex, and diabetes as primary renal disease. Among patients aged ≥65 years, only SCD transplantation provided a significant survival benefit compared to dialysis, with a mortality of 16.3% (95% confidence interval 13.2%-19.9%) with SCD transplantation, 20.5% (16.1%-24.6%) with ECD transplantation, and 24.6% (19.4%-29.5%) with continued dialysis. Relative mortality risk was increased in the first months after transplantation compared to dialysis, with equivalent risk levels reached earlier with SCD than ECD transplantation in all age groups. The results of this study suggest that older patients might gain a survival benefit with SCD transplantation versus dialysis, but any survival benefit with ECD transplantation versus dialysis may be small

High-urgency kidney transplantation in the Eurotransplant Kidney Allocation System: success or waste of organs? The Eurotransplant 15-year all-centre survey.

BACKGROUND: In the Eurotransplant Kidney Allocation System (ETKAS), transplant candidates can be considered for high-urgency (HU) status in case of life-threatening inability to undergo renal replacement therapy. Data on the outcomes of HU transplantation are sparse and the benefit is controversial. METHODS: We systematically analysed data from 898 ET HU kidney transplant recipients from 61 transplant centres between 1996 and 2010 and investigated the 5-year patient and graft outcomes and differences between relevant subgroups. RESULTS: Kidney recipients with an HU status were younger (median 43 versus 55 years) and spent less time on the waiting list compared with non-HU recipients (34 versus 54 months). They received grafts with significantly more mismatches (mean 3.79 versus 2.42; P < 0.001) and the percentage of retransplantations was remarkably higher (37.5 versus 16.7%). Patient survival (P = 0.0053) and death with a functioning graft (DwFG; P < 0.0001) after HU transplantation were significantly worse than in non-HU recipients, whereas graft outcome was comparable (P = 0.094). Analysis according to the different HU indications revealed that recipients listed HU because of an imminent lack of access for dialysis had a significantly worse patient survival (P = 0.0053) and DwFG (P = 0.0462) compared with recipients with psychological problems and suicidality because of dialysis. In addition, retransplantation had a negative impact on patient and graft outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Facing organ shortages, increasing wait times and considerable mortality on dialysis, we question the current policy of HU allocation and propose more restrictive criteria with regard to individuals with vascular complications or repeated retransplantations in order to support patients on the non-HU waiting list with a much better long-term prognosis

Recommendations for improving the quality of rare disease registries

Rare diseases (RD) patient registries are powerful instruments that help develop clinical research, facilitate the planning of appropriate clinical trials, improve patient care, and support healthcare management. They constitute a key information system that supports the activities of European Reference Networks (ERNs) on rare diseases. A rapid proliferation of RD registries has occurred during the last years and there is a need to develop guidance for the minimum requirements, recommendations and standards necessary to maintain a high-quality registry. In response to these heterogeneities, in the framework of RD-Connect, a European platform connecting databases, registries, biobanks and clinical bioinformatics for rare disease research, we report on a list of recommendations, developed by a group of experts, including members of patient organizations, to be used as a framework for improving the quality of RD registries. This list includes aspects of governance, Findable, Accessible, Interoperable and Reusable (FAIR) data and information, infrastructure, documentation, training, and quality audit. The list is intended to be used by established as well as new RD registries. Further work includes the development of a toolkit to enable continuous assessment and improvement of their organizational and data quality.Supported by the RD-CONNECT: an integrated platform connecting registries, biobanks and clinical bioinformatics for rare disease research, which received funding from the European Union within the framework of FP7 Collaborative projectHEALTH.2012.2.1.1-1-C [Grant agreement number: 305444]. Supported partly also by EuRRECa: European Registries for Rare Endocrine Conditions, which received funding from the European Union within the framework of CHAFEA Health Programme (2014–2020) [Grant agreement number: 777215] and the COST Action CA16210 “Maximising Impact of research in NeuroDevelopmental Disorders”

Kidney Transplantation After Rescue Allocation-the Eurotransplant Experience:A Retrospective Multicenter Outcome Analysis

BACKGROUND: At Eurotransplant (ET), kidneys are transferred to 'rescue allocation' (RA), whenever the standard allocation (SA) algorithms Eurotransplant kidney allocation system (ETKAS) and Eurotransplant senior program (ESP) fail. We analyzed the outcome of RA. METHODS: Retrospective patient clinical and demographic characteristics association analyses with graft outcomes for 2,421 recipients of a deceased donor renal transplantation (DDRT) after RA versus 25,475 after SA from 71 centers across all ET countries from 2006 to 2018. RESULTS: Numbers of DDRTs after RA increased over the time, especially in Germany. RA played a minor role in ESP vs. ETKAS (2.7% vs. 10.4%). RA recipients and donors were older compared to SA recipients and donors, cold ischemia times were longer, waiting times were shorter, and the incidence of primary non-function was comparable. Among ETKAS-recipients, HLA matching was more favorable in SA (mean 3.7 vs. 2.5). In multivariate modeling, the incidence of death with a functioning graft (DwFG) in ETKAS was reduced in RA compared to SA (subdistribution hazard ratio 0.70, 95% confidence interval [0.60-0.81], p<0.001) whereas other outcomes (mortality, graft loss) were not significantly different. None of the three outcomes were significantly different when comparing RA with SA within the ESP program. CONCLUSIONS: Facing increased waiting times and mortality on dialysis due to donor shortage, this study reveals encouragingly positive DDRT outcomes following RA. This supports the extension of RA to more patients and as an alternative tool to enable transplantation in patients in countries with prohibitively long waiting times or at risk of deterioration.Supplemental Visual Abstract; http://links.lww.com/TP/C297