BACKGROUND: Midodrine is often needed pretransplant to improve hemodynamics in simultaneous liver-kidney transplant candidates. Previous research has shown that patients requiring midodrine before kidney transplant alone have increased posttransplant risk for delayed allograft function, graft failure, and death. However, the impact of pretransplant midodrine use on outcomes after simultaneous liver-kidney transplant is unknown. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study of all adult (age ≥18 y) simultaneous liver-kidney transplant recipients from a single academic transplant center from February 1, 2002, to June 30, 2019. RESULTS: Sixty-four simultaneous liver-kidney transplants were performed in our institution during this time period, of which, 43 were not on midodrine before transplant, 17 were on midodrine alone, and 4 were on intravenous (IV) vasopressor therapy. Despite the midodrine group having a higher MELD-Na at listing, higher MELD-Na at transplant, and being older, there were no significant differences in key outcomes including delayed renal allograft function, estimated glomerular filtration rate at transplant discharge, and estimated glomerular filtration rate at 1 y after transplant compared with the nonmidodrine group. There was no significant difference in graft failure or survival at last follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that need for pretransplant midodrine should not be a barrier to simultaneous liver-kidney transplant.

BACKGROUND: Upper endoscopy (EGD) is frequently performed in patients with esophageal complaints following anti-reflux surgery such as fundoplication. Endoscopic evaluation of fundoplication wrap integrity can be challenging. Our primary aim in this pilot study was to evaluate the accuracy and confidence of assessing Nissen fundoplication integrity and hiatus herniation among gastroenterology (GI) fellows, subspecialists, and foregut surgeons. METHODS: Five variations of post-Nissen fundoplication anatomy were included in a survey of 20 sets of EGD images that was completed by GI fellows, general GI attendings, esophagologists, and foregut surgeons. Accuracy, diagnostic confidence, and inter-rater agreement across providers were evaluated. RESULTS: There were 31 respondents in the final cohort. Confidence in pre-survey diagnostics significantly differed by provider type (mean confidence out of 5 was 1.8 for GI fellows, 2.7 for general GI attendings, 3.6 for esophagologists, and 3.6 for foregut surgeons, P = 0.01). The mean overall accuracy was 45.9%, which significantly differed by provider type with the lowest rate among GI fellows (37%) and highest among esophagologists (53%; P = 0.01). The accuracy was highest among esophagologists across all wrap integrity variations. Inter-rater agreement was low across wrap integrity variations (Krippendorfs alpha <0.30), indicating low to no agreement between providers. CONCLUSION: In this multi-center survey study, GI fellows had the lowest accuracy and confidence in assessing EGD images after Nissen fundoplication, whereas esophagologists had the highest. Diagnostic confidence varied considerably and inter-rater agreement was poor. These findings suggest experience may improve confidence, but highlight the need to improve the evaluation of fundoplication wraps.