Textbook Outcomes in Solid Transplantation: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: The concept of TO is expanding across various surgical disciplines to establish a standardized, comprehensive quality benchmark. Traditional metrics such as 1-y patient and graft survival have been key for evaluating transplant program performance but are now deemed inadequate because of significant field advancements. This systematic review aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of the applicability and validity of textbook outcome (TO) in the setting of solid organ transplantation. METHODS: A structured search, adhering to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, was conducted across PubMed, Embase, and Scopus databases on March 10, 2024. RESULTS: Fourteen articles were identified for inclusion in this review. Of these, 2 studies addressed TO in heart transplantation, 3 in lung transplantation, 2 in kidney transplantation, and 7 in liver transplantation. A subgroup analysis was conducted to categorize the different definitions of TOs and identify the most common reasons for TO failure. CONCLUSIONS: Our systematic review highlights the ongoing efforts in the field of solid organ transplantation to define TO and emphasizes the importance of developing a universally recognized set of TO criteria for each type of transplant. TO provides a valuable framework for transplant centers to benchmark their performance against similar institutions on a risk-adjusted basis and to pinpoint specific areas for enhancing patient outcomes. Even the most successful programs may discover aspects within the composite outcome with scope for improvement.

Duke Scholars

Author Joseph Ladowski  

Author Andrew Serghios Barbas Surgery, Abdominal Transplant Surgery

Author Matthew Hartwig Surgery, Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery

Author Alessandro Martinino