Daniel G Maluf1, Erick B Edwards, H Myron Kauffman. 1. Division of Transplant, Department of Surgery, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA 23298-0248, USA. dgmaluf@vcu.edu
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The goal of this analysis was to determine if outcomes from the use of extended criteria donor (ECD) livers were dependent upon the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score of the recipient. METHODS: The Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) database as of March 4, 2006 was used for the analysis. Data from 12,056 adult liver transplant (LTx) recipients between June 1, 2002 and June 30, 2005 was analyzed. The donor risk index (DRI) was calculated as previously reported. A DRI of > or =1.7 was classified as ECD. Relative risk (RR) estimates were derived from Cox regression models adjusted for DRI, recipient MELD, age, sex, ethnicity, diagnosis, and year of transplant. RESULTS: Data from 2,873 grafts falling in the ECD category (23.8%) and their recipients were analyzed. Recipients with low MELD scores (<15) received the highest proportion of ECD livers (33%). ECD livers were associated with a significant increase in the RR of graft failure within each MELD category. However, this effect held within each of the three MELD categories. CONCLUSION: The use of ECD grafts expands the organ pool at expense of increased RR of liver failure. Our analysis showed no significant interaction between DRI and MELD score of the recipient. The fact that there is no additional impact of ECD livers in recipients with high MELD scores suggests that this group of patients may benefit from this pool of grafts.
BACKGROUND: The goal of this analysis was to determine if outcomes from the use of extended criteria donor (ECD) livers were dependent upon the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score of the recipient. METHODS: The Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) database as of March 4, 2006 was used for the analysis. Data from 12,056 adult liver transplant (LTx) recipients between June 1, 2002 and June 30, 2005 was analyzed. The donor risk index (DRI) was calculated as previously reported. A DRI of > or =1.7 was classified as ECD. Relative risk (RR) estimates were derived from Cox regression models adjusted for DRI, recipient MELD, age, sex, ethnicity, diagnosis, and year of transplant. RESULTS: Data from 2,873 grafts falling in the ECD category (23.8%) and their recipients were analyzed. Recipients with low MELD scores (<15) received the highest proportion of ECD livers (33%). ECD livers were associated with a significant increase in the RR of graft failure within each MELD category. However, this effect held within each of the three MELD categories. CONCLUSION: The use of ECD grafts expands the organ pool at expense of increased RR of liver failure. Our analysis showed no significant interaction between DRI and MELD score of the recipient. The fact that there is no additional impact of ECD livers in recipients with high MELD scores suggests that this group of patients may benefit from this pool of grafts.
Authors: Sebastian Pratschke; Alexandra Rauch; Markus Albertsmeier; Markus Rentsch; Michaela Kirschneck; Joachim Andrassy; Michael Thomas; Werner Hartwig; Joan Figueras; Juan Del Rio Martin; Nicola De Ruvo; Jens Werner; Markus Guba; Maximilian Weniger; Martin K Angele Journal: World J Surg Date: 2016-12 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: Laura Ioana Mazilescu; Sreelakshmi Kotha; Anand Ghanekar; Leslie Lilly; Trevor W Reichman; Zita Galvin; Mark S Cattral; Mamatha Bhat; Ian D McGilvray; Gonzalo Sapisochin; Blayne Sayed; Markus Selzner; Nazia Selzner Journal: Transplant Direct Date: 2021-07-16