Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2019 Dec;19(12):3276-3283.
doi: 10.1111/ajt.15567. Epub 2019 Sep 22.

Impact of the 2016 revision of US Pediatric Heart Allocation Policy on waitlist characteristics and outcomes

Defne A Magnetta  1 , Justin Godown  2 , Shawn West  3 , Matthew Zinn  3 , Kirsten Rose-Felker  3 , Susan Miller  3 , Brian Feingold  3   4
Affiliations
Free article

Impact of the 2016 revision of US Pediatric Heart Allocation Policy on waitlist characteristics and outcomes

Defne A Magnetta et al. Am J Transplant. 2019 Dec.
Free article

Abstract

US Pediatric Heart Allocation Policy was recently revised, deprioritizing candidates with cardiomyopathy while maintaining status 1A eligibility for congenital heart disease (CHD) candidates on "high-dose" inotropes. We compared waitlist characteristics and mortality around this change. Status 1A listings decreased (70% to 56%, P < .001) and CHD representation increased among status 1A listings (48% vs 64%, P < .001). Waitlist mortality overall (subdistribution hazard ratio [SHR] 0.96, P = .63) and among status 1A candidates (SHR 1.16, P = .14) were unchanged. CHD waitlist mortality trended better (SHR 0.82, P = .06) but was unchanged for CHD candidates listed status 1A (SHR 0.92, P = .47). Status 1A listing exceptions increased 2- to 3-fold among hypertrophic and restrictive cardiomyopathy candidates and 13.5-fold among dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) candidates. Hypertrophic (SHR 6.25, P = .004) and restrictive (SHR 3.87, P = .03) cardiomyopathy candidates without status 1A exception had increased waitlist mortality, but those with DCM did not (SHR 1.26, P = .32). Ventricular assist device (VAD) use increased only among DCM candidates ≥1 years old (26% vs 38%, P < .001). Current allocation policy has increased CHD status 1A representation but has not improved their waitlist mortality. Excessive DCM status 1A listing exceptions and continued status 1A prioritization of children on stable VADs potentially diminish the intended benefits of policy revision.

Keywords: Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN); United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS); clinical research/practice; heart disease: congenital; heart transplantation/cardiology; organ allocation; organ procurement and allocation; patient survival; pediatrics.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

References

REFERENCES

    1. McDiarmid SV, Cherikh WS, Sweet SC. Preventable death: children on the transplant waiting list. Am J Transplant. 2008;8(12):2491-2495.
    1. Organ Donation and Children. U.S. Government Information on Organ Donation and Transplantation. https://www.organdonor.gov/about/donors/child-infant.html. Accessed July 1, 2019.
    1. Colvin M, Smith JM, Hadley N, et al. OPTN/SRTR 2017 annual data report: heart. Am J Transplant. 2019;19(suppl 2):323-403.
    1. Almond CSD, Thiagarajan RR, Piercey GE, et al. Waiting list mortality among children listed for heart transplantation in the United States. Circulation. 2009;119(5):717-727.
    1. Dipchand AI, Kirk R, Naftel DC, et al. Ventricular assist device support as a bridge to transplantation in pediatric patients. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018;72(4):402-415.

Publication types