{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.045820433436532505, 'fraction_numerical': 0.04643962848297214, 'mean_word_length': 4.91941391941392, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 2, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Short‐term outcomes of deceased donor renal transplants of HCV uninfected recipients from HCV seropositive nonviremic donors and viremic donors in the era of direct‐acting antivirals

The United States opioid use epidemic over the past decade has coincided with an increase in hepatitis C virus (HCV) positive donors. Using propensity score matching, and the Organ Procurement Transplant Network data files from January 2015 to June 2019, we analyzed the short‐term outcomes of adult deceased donor kidney transplants of HCV uninfected recipients with two distinct groups of HCV positive donors (HCV seropositive, nonviremic n = 352 and viremic n = 196) compared to those performed using HCV uninfected donors (n = 36 934). Compared to the reference group, the transplants performed using HCV seropositive, nonviremic and viremic donors experienced a lower proportion of delayed graft function (35.2 vs 18.9%; P < .001 [HCV seropositive, nonviremic donors] and 36.2 vs 16.8% ; P < .001[HCV viremic donors]). The recipients of HCV viremic donors had better allograft function at 6 months posttransplant (eGFR [54.1 vs 68.3 mL/min/1.73 m2; P = .004]. Furthermore, there was no statistical difference in the overall graft failure risk at 12 months posttransplant by propensity score matched multivariable Cox proportional analysis (HR = 0.60, 95% CI 0.23 to 1.29 [HCV seropositive, nonviremic donors] and HR = 0.85, 95% CI 0.25 to 2.96 [HCV viremic donors]). Further studies are required to determine the long‐term outcomes of these transplants and address unanswered questions regarding the use of HCV viremic donors.