<p><strong>BACKGROUND: </strong>To date, no study has evaluated the effects of low center performance evaluations (CPE) on pediatric heart transplant center behavior. We sought to assess the impact of low CPE flags on pediatric heart transplant center listing and transplant volumes and center recipient and donor characteristics.</p>

<p><strong>METHODS: </strong>We included centers performing at least 10 pediatric (age &lt;18 years) transplants during the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients reporting period January 2009-June 2011 and evaluated consecutive biannual program specific reports until the last reporting period January 2016-June 2018. We evaluated changes in center behavior at following time points: a year before flagging, a year and two years after the flag; and at last reporting period.</p>

<p><strong>RESULTS: </strong>During our study period, 24 pediatric centers were non-flagged and 6 were flagged. Compared to non-flagged centers, there was a decline in candidate listings in flagged centers at the last reporting period (mean increase of 5.5 ± 12.4 listings vs"?&gt; mean decrease of 14.0 ± 14.9 listings; p&nbsp;=&nbsp;.003). Similarly, the number of transplants declined in flagged centers (mean increase of 2.6 ± 9.6 transplants vs"?&gt; mean decrease of 10.0 ± 12.8 transplants; p&nbsp;=&nbsp;.012). Flagged centers had declines in listings for patients with restrictive cardiomyopathy, re-transplant, renal dysfunction, those on mechanical ventilation and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. There was no significant change in donor characteristics between flagged and non-flagged centers.</p>

<p><strong>CONCLUSIONS: </strong>Low CPE may have unintended negative consequences on center behavior leading to declines in listing and transplant volumes and potentially leading to decreased listing for higher risk recipients.</p>

<p><strong>BACKGROUND: </strong>Proliferation signal inhibitors, such as sirolimus, are increasingly used in solid-organ transplantation. However, limited data exist on sirolimus-treated pediatric patients. We aimed to describe sirolimus use in pediatric heart transplant patients and test the hypothesis that sirolimus use is associated with improved outcomes.</p>

<p><strong>METHODS: </strong>A retrospective review and propensity-matched analysis of the Pediatric Heart Transplant Study database was performed on patients undergoing primary heart transplantation from 2004 to 2013 with at least 1 year of follow-up comparing patients treated vs not treated with sirolimus at 1 year after transplant. The primary outcome of interest was patient survival, with secondary outcomes including cardiac allograft vasculopathy, rejection, malignancy, and renal insufficiency.</p>

<p><strong>RESULTS: </strong>Between 2004 and 2013, 2,531 patients underwent transplantation. At least 1 year of follow-up was available for 2,080 patients, of whom 144 (7%) were on sirolimus at 1 year post-transplant. Sirolimus-treated and non-treated patients had similar survival in the overall cohorts and in the propensity-matched analysis. The secondary outcomes measures were also similar, including a composite end point of all outcome measures. There was a trend toward increased time to cardiac allograft vasculopathy (p = 0.09) and decreased time to infection (p = 0.05) among sirolimus-treated patients in the overall cohort (p = 0.19) but not in the propensity-matched cohort (p = 0.17).</p>

<p><strong>CONCLUSIONS: </strong>Sirolimus was used in less than 10% of patients at 1 year post-transplant. Overall outcomes of sirolimus treated and non-treated patients were similar with respect to survival and major transplant adverse events. Further study of sirolimus in pediatric heart transplant patients is needed.</p>