Literature DB >> 21604357

Impact of center volume on outcomes of increased-risk liver transplants.

Deepak K Ozhathil1, You Fu Li, Jillian K Smith, Jennifer F Tseng, Reza F Saidi, Adel Bozorgzadeh, Shimul A Shah.   

Abstract

The use of high-risk donor livers, which is reflective of the gross national shortage of organs available for transplantation, has gained momentum. Despite the demand, many marginal livers are discarded annually. We evaluated the impact of center volume on survival outcomes associated with liver transplantation using high-donor risk index (DRI) allografts. We queried the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients database for deceased donor liver transplants (n = 31,576) performed between 2002 and 2008 for patients who were 18 years old or older, and we excluded partial and multiple liver transplants. A high-DRI cohort (n = 15,668), which was composed of patients receiving grafts with DRIs > 1.90, was analyzed separately. Transplant centers (n = 102) were categorized into tertiles by their annual procedure volumes: high-volume centers (HVCs; 78-215 cases per year), medium-volume centers (MVCs; 49-77 cases per year), and low-volume centers (LVCs; 5-48 cases per year). The endpoints were allograft survival and recipient survival. In comparison with their lower volume counterparts, HVCs used donors with higher mean DRIs (2.07 for HVCs, 2.01 for MVCs, and 1.91 for LVCs), more donors who were 60 years old or older (18.02% for HVCs, 16.85% for MVCs, and 12.39% for LVCs), more donors who died after a stroke (46.52% for HVCs, 43.71% for MVCs, and 43.36% for LVCs), and more donation after cardiac death organs (5.04% for HVCs, 4.45% for MVCs, and 3.51% for LVCs, all P values < 0.001). Multivariate risk-adjusted frailty models showed that increased procedure volume at a transplant center led to decreased risks of allograft failure [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.93, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.89-0.98, P = 0.002] and recipient death (HR = 0.90, 95% CI = 0.83-0.97, P = 0.004) for high-DRI liver transplants. In conclusion, HVCs more frequently used higher DRI livers and achieved better risk-adjusted allograft and recipient survival. A greater understanding of the outcomes of transplantation with high-DRI livers may improve their utilization, the postoperative outcomes, and future allocation practices.
Copyright © 2011 American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21604357     DOI: 10.1002/lt.22343

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Liver Transpl        ISSN: 1527-6465            Impact factor:   5.799


  25 in total

1.  Centre volume and resource consumption in liver transplantation.

Authors:  Christopher W Macomber; Joshua J Shaw; Heena Santry; Reza F Saidi; Nicolas Jabbour; Jennifer F Tseng; Adel Bozorgzadeh; Shimul A Shah
Journal:  HPB (Oxford)       Date:  2012-06-10       Impact factor: 3.647

2.  Patient, center and geographic characteristics of nationally placed livers.

Authors:  J C Lai; J P Roberts; E Vittinghoff; N A Terrault; S Feng
Journal:  Am J Transplant       Date:  2012-02-02       Impact factor: 8.086

Review 3.  Development of organ-specific donor risk indices.

Authors:  Sanjeev K Akkina; Sumeet K Asrani; Yi Peng; Peter Stock; W Ray Kim; Ajay K Israni
Journal:  Liver Transpl       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 5.799

4.  Offer acceptance practices and geographic variability in allocation model for end-stage liver disease at transplant.

Authors:  Andrew Wey; Joshua Pyke; David P Schladt; Sommer E Gentry; Tim Weaver; Nicholas Salkowski; Bertram L Kasiske; Ajay K Israni; Jon J Snyder
Journal:  Liver Transpl       Date:  2018-04       Impact factor: 5.799

Review 5.  [Deceased donor liver transplantation].

Authors:  D Seehofer; W Schöning; P Neuhaus
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2013-05       Impact factor: 0.955

6.  Hepatic artery and biliary complications in liver transplant recipients undergoing pretransplant transarterial chemoembolization.

Authors:  Aparna Goel; Neil Mehta; Jennifer Guy; Nicholas Fidelman; Francis Yao; John Roberts; Norah Terrault
Journal:  Liver Transpl       Date:  2014-10       Impact factor: 5.799

7.  Association of Kidney Transplant Center Volume With 3-Year Clinical Outcomes.

Authors:  Elizabeth M Sonnenberg; Jordana B Cohen; Jesse Y Hsu; Vishnu S Potluri; Matthew H Levine; Peter L Abt; Peter P Reese
Journal:  Am J Kidney Dis       Date:  2019-05-07       Impact factor: 8.860

8.  Outcomes following liver transplantation in intensive care unit patients.

Authors:  Lena Sibulesky; Michael G Heckman; C Burcin Taner; Juan M Canabal; Nancy N Diehl; Dana K Perry; Darren L Willingham; Surakit Pungpapong; Barry G Rosser; David J Kramer; Justin H Nguyen
Journal:  World J Hepatol       Date:  2013-01-27

9.  Is liver transplantation safe and effective in elderly (≥70 years) recipients? A case-controlled analysis.

Authors:  Gregory C Wilson; R Cutler Quillin; Koffi Wima; Jeffrey M Sutton; Richard S Hoehn; Dennis J Hanseman; Ian M Paquette; Flavio Paterno; E Steve Woodle; Daniel E Abbott; Shimul A Shah
Journal:  HPB (Oxford)       Date:  2014-08-06       Impact factor: 3.647

10.  Exploring pre-surgery donor-specific antibodies in the context of organ shortage in liver transplant.

Authors:  Savio G Barreto; Mark E Brooke-Smith; Eu Ling Neo; Paul Dolan; Richard Leibbrandt; Tim Emery; Robert Carroll; Alan Wigg; John W Chen
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2019-11-20       Impact factor: 3.445

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.