Literature DB >> 25840540

Hospital Resource Use with Donation after Cardiac Death Allografts in Liver Transplantation: A Matched Controlled Analysis from 2007 to 2011.

Ashish Singhal1, Koffi Wima1, Richard S Hoehn1, R Cutler Quillin1, E Steve Woodle1, Ian M Paquette1, Flavio Paterno1, Daniel E Abbott1, Shimul A Shah2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although donation after cardiac death (DCD) liver allografts have been used to expand the donor pool, concerns exist regarding primary nonfunction and biliary complications. Our aim was to compare resource use and outcomes of DCD allografts with donation after brain death (DBD) liver allografts. STUDY
DESIGN: Using a linkage between the University HealthSystem Consortium and Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients databases, we identified 11,856 patients who underwent deceased donor liver transplantation (LT) from 2007 to 2011. Patients were divided into 2 cohorts based on type of allograft (DCD vs DBD). Matched pair analysis (n = 613 in each group) was used to compare outcomes of the 2 donor types.
RESULTS: Donation after cardiac death allografts comprised 5.2% (n = 613) of all LTs in the studied cohort; DCD allograft recipients were healthier and had lower median Model of End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score (17 vs 19; p < 0.0001). Post LT, there was no significant difference in length of stay, perioperative mortality, and discharge to home rates. However, DCD allografts were associated with higher direct cost ($110,414 vs $99,543; p < 0.0001) and 30-day readmission rates (46.4% vs 37.1%; p < 0.0001). Matched analysis revealed that DCD allografts were associated with higher direct cost, readmission rates, and inferior graft survival.
CONCLUSIONS: While confirming the previous reports of inferior graft survival associated with DCD allografts, this is the first national report to show increased financial and resource use associated with DCD compared with DBD allografts in a matched recipient cohort.
Copyright © 2015 American College of Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25840540     DOI: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2015.01.052

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Coll Surg        ISSN: 1072-7515            Impact factor:   6.113


  3 in total

1.  Frailty, mortality, and health care utilization after liver transplantation: From the Multicenter Functional Assessment in Liver Transplantation (FrAILT) Study.

Authors:  Jennifer C Lai; Amy M Shui; Andres Duarte-Rojo; Daniel R Ganger; Robert S Rahimi; Chiung-Yu Huang; Frederick Yao; Matthew Kappus; Brian Boyarsky; Mara McAdams-Demarco; Michael L Volk; Michael A Dunn; Daniela P Ladner; Dorry L Segev; Elizabeth C Verna; Sandy Feng
Journal:  Hepatology       Date:  2021-12-29       Impact factor: 17.298

Review 2.  Biliary complications after liver transplantation: current perspectives and future strategies.

Authors:  Bianca Magro; Matteo Tacelli; Alessandra Mazzola; Filomena Conti; Ciro Celsa
Journal:  Hepatobiliary Surg Nutr       Date:  2021-01       Impact factor: 7.293

3.  Expanding the donor pool: Donation after circulatory death and living liver donation do not compromise the results of liver transplantation.

Authors:  Dagmar Kollmann; Gonzalo Sapisochin; Nicolas Goldaracena; Bettina E Hansen; Ramraj Rajakumar; Nazia Selzner; Mamatha Bhat; Stuart McCluskey; Mark S Cattral; Paul D Greig; Les Lilly; Ian D McGilvray; Anand Ghanekar; David R Grant; Markus Selzner
Journal:  Liver Transpl       Date:  2018-05-14       Impact factor: 5.799

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.