Background: Millions of Americans are living in food deserts in the United States, however the role of the local food environment on COPD has not been studied. The aim of this study is to determine the association between food deserts and COPD-related outcomes. Method: In this cross-sectional analysis we linked data collected from SPIROMICS (SubPopulations and InteRmediate Outcome Measures in COPD Study) between 2010 and 2015 and food desert data, defined as an underserved area that lacks access to affordable healthy foods, from the Food Access Research Atlas. COPD outcomes include percentage of predicted forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1%), St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), COPD Assessment Test (CAT), 6-min walk distance test (6MWD), exacerbations, and air trapping. We used generalized linear mixed models to evaluate the association between living in food deserts and respiratory outcomes, adjusting for age, gender, race, education, income, marital status, BMI, smoking status, pack years, and urban status Results: Among 2713 participants, 22% lived in food deserts. Participants living in food deserts were less likely to be white and more likely to have a lower income than those who did not live in food deserts. In the adjusted model controlling for demographics and individual income, living in food deserts was associated lower FEV1% (β = – 2.51, P = 0.046), higher air trapping (β = 2.47, P = 0.008), worse SGRQ (β = 3.48, P = 0.001) and CAT (β = 1.20, P = 0.003) scores, and 56% greater odds of severe exacerbations (P = 0.004). Results were consistent when looking at food access alone, regardless of whether participants lived in low income areas. Conclusions: Findings suggest an independent association between food desert and food access alone with COPD outcomes. Health program planning may benefit from addressing disparities in access to food.

Limited guidelines exist for treating immunocompromised patients hospitalized for acute viral respiratory infection. Little is known about clinical and economic benefits of IVIG administration in patients with acute viral respiratory infections. We compared clinical and economic outcomes among immunocompromised patients hospitalized with viral respiratory infections who received IVIG to those who did not. We performed a retrospective cohort study on all patients hospitalized for a respiratory viral infection between 2011 and 2016 at two large academic centers including data on age, gender, virus species, immunosuppression type, and receipt of IVIG. Outcomes included death, hospital readmission, length of stay (LOS) in the hospital, and the intensive care unit (ICU). A total of 270 patient admissions were reviewed, and 35.6% received IVIG. The average age was 40.6 years, 50% were female and 74% were transplant patients. The most common virus was rhinovirus (50.7%). Use of IVIG was significantly associated with a shorter ICU LOS (β=-0.534, P=0.012), and a longer hospital LOS (β=0.887, P<0.01). IVIG administered within 48 hours of hospitalization (n=229) was associated with a shorter ICU LOS (β=-2.08, P=0.001) and a shorter hospital LOS for patients hospitalized at least 2 days (β=-0.461, P=0.007). There were no significant differences in readmission rates or death. This double-center, retrospective cohort analysis is one of the first studies to evaluate the effect of IVIG on immunocompromised patients hospitalized with respiratory viral infections. IVIG was associated with a shorter hospital and ICU LOS, especially when administered within 48 hours of admission.

Objectives: Acute liver failure (ALF) is associated with high morbidity and mortality. Timely liver transplantation (LT) is the only universally accepted therapy for ALF that is non-responsive to medical therapy. Data regarding the use of living donor LT (LDLT) for this indication in the US is scarce. Materials and Methods: United Network of Organ Sharing/Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (UNOS/OPTN) data from January 2002 to December 2020 were reviewed. Adult and pediatric recipients listed as status 1 were included. Demographics, clinical and laboratory data, and post-LT survival rates were compared for LDLT vs. DDLT recipients. Results: There were 180 LDLT (3.6%) and 4779 DDLT (96.4%) recipients with a diagnosis of ALF. The majority of recipients in the LDLT group were pediatric (n = 164, 91%) compared to the DDLT group (n = 1455, 30%), p < 0.001. In the pediatric-only group, post-LT survival was comparable between LDLT and DDLT recipients (p = 0.15). Five-year post-LT survival was higher for pediatric recipients compared to adults in the LDLT group (84.2% vs. 62.5%, respectively, p < 0.001) and the DDLT group (82.8% vs. 78.7%, respectively, p < 0.001). Adults had a higher hazard of death compared to pediatric recipients in the LDLT group (HR = 3.560, 95% CI 1.612–7.844, p = 0.002) and the DDLT group (HR = 1.472, 95% CI 1.290–1.679, p < 0.001). In multivariate analysis results, the type of LT and age group were not associated with higher post-LT mortality. Conclusions: In the US, LDLT constitutes 3.6% of LTs for ALF. In the pediatric-only group, post-LT survival was comparable between LDLT and DDLT recipients. Overall, there were superior post-LT outcomes for pediatric recipients compared to adults for LDLT and DDLT.