๐”– Bobbio Scriptorium
โœฆ   LIBER   โœฆ

Heterogeneity in liver allocation

โœ Scribed by Richard Freeman


Book ID
102467691
Publisher
John Wiley and Sons
Year
2004
Tongue
English
Weight
60 KB
Volume
10
Category
Article
ISSN
1527-6465

No coin nor oath required. For personal study only.

โœฆ Synopsis


Context: The Model for Endstage Liver Disease (MELD) score serves as the basis for the distribution of deceaseddonor (DD) livers and was developed in response to "the final rule" mandate, whose stated principle is to allocate livers according to a patient's medical need, with less emphasis on keeping organs in the local procurement area. However, in selected areas of the United States, organs are kept in organ procurement organizations (OPOs) with small waiting lists and transplanted into less-sick patients instead of being allocated to sicker patients in nearby transplant centers in OPOs with large waiting lists. Objective: To determine whether there is a difference in MELD scores for liver transplant recipients receiving transplants in small vs large OPOs. Design and Setting: Retrospective review of the US Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients between February 28, 2002, and March 31, 2003. Transplant recipients (N โ€ซุโ€ฌ 4798) had end-stage liver disease and received DD livers. Main Outcome Measures: MELD score distribution (range, 6-40), graft survival, and patient survival for liver transplant recipients in small (<100) and large (> or โ€ซุโ€ฌ 100 on the waiting list) OPOs. Results:

The distribution of MELD scores was the same in large and small OPOs; 92% had a MELD score of 18 or less, 7% had a MELD score between 19 and 24, and only 2% of listed patients had a MELD score higher than 24 (P โ€ซุโ€ฌ .85). The proportion of patients receiving transplants in small OPOs and with a MELD score higher than 24 was significantly lower than that in large OPOs (19% vs 49%; P < .001). Patient survival rates at 1 year after transplantation for small OPOs (86.4%) and large OPOs (86.6%) were not statistically different (P โ€ซุโ€ฌ .59), and neither were graft survival rates in small OPOs (80.1%) and large OPOs (81.3%) (P โ€ซุโ€ฌ .80). Conclusions: There is a significant disparity in MELD scores in liver transplant recipients in small vs large OPOs; fewer transplant recipients in small OPOs have severe liver disease (MELD score >24). This disparity does not reflect the stated goals of the current allocation policy, which is to distribute livers according to a patient's medical need, with less emphasis on keeping organs in the local procurement area. (


๐Ÿ“œ SIMILAR VOLUMES


Issues in donor liver allocation
โœ Shaw, Byers W. ๐Ÿ“‚ Article ๐Ÿ“… 1995 ๐Ÿ› Wiley (John Wiley & Sons) ๐ŸŒ English โš– 93 KB

## Issues in Donor liver Allocation n this, the inaugural publication of The Crucible, we examine the issue of donor liver allocation. I To that purpose, we have invited discussion from a panel of authors with wide-ranging perspectives on this issue. Randy Bollinger is a former President of the U

The heterogeneity of liver ferritins
โœ P.L. Ringeling; M.J. Kroos; M.K. Cleton-Soeteman; A.A.W. de Jong; W.C. de Bruijn ๐Ÿ“‚ Article ๐Ÿ“… 1989 ๐Ÿ› Elsevier Science ๐ŸŒ English โš– 96 KB
Organ allocation for liver-intestine can
โœ Simon Horslen ๐Ÿ“‚ Article ๐Ÿ“… 2004 ๐Ÿ› John Wiley and Sons ๐ŸŒ English โš– 99 KB

## Key Points 1. Patients listed for combined liver and intestine transplantation have the highest waitlist mortality of any transplant candidates. 2. Liver-intestine candidates have higher mortality rates than other patients listed for liver transplantation at all model for end-stage liver disease