The Operational Impact of Registry size, Cycle length, and Blood Type Distribution in Multi-Registry Kidney Exchange Programs
Kidney exchange programs address donor recipient incompatibility by exchanging donors between incompatible pairs, but single center KEPs often suffer from limited donor pools, which reduce matching efficiency. Multi registry kidney exchange programs offer a promising solution but face challenges, including heterogeneous constraints across registries, cycle-length bounds, and data-sharing limitations. This study uses simulation to compare mKEP allocation against individual registry operation, contrasting unconstrained pooling with two safeguarded mechanisms: a cumulative individual-rationality guarantee and a Shapley value based fair-share mechanism. We examine how registry size, blood-type distribution, cycle-length bounds, and dropout probability affect the size and distribution of achievable gain. Our central finding is that the benefit of joining an mKEP is systematically uneven: under blood group composition asymmetry, the easier-to-match registry gains less than its partner even under both safeguarded mechanisms, and a larger registry gains less than a smaller one when pooled. A registry combining a larger arrival rate with an easier-to-match pool may see its gain under either safeguarded mechanism fall too small to be practically significant, while registries with a higher dropout rate see a larger benefit from pooling. This unevenness concentrates in O-type recipients: an easier-to-match registry sees fewer O-type transplants within itself under pooling, though O-type transplant rates rise system-wide. Tighter cycle-length bounds increase, rather than diminish, the relative transplant-volume benefit of pooling, while match quality is only modestly affected by any factor examined. These results highlight the importance of pairing multi-registry collaboration with a carefully designed, equitable benefit-sharing mechanism to keep participation attractive for all registries involved.