Literature DB >> 26174971

Age and equity in liver transplantation: An organ allocation model.

Alessandro Cucchetti1, Lainie Friedman Ross2,3,4, J Richard Thistlethwaite3,4, Alessandro Vitale5, Matteo Ravaioli1, Matteo Cescon1, Giorgio Ercolani1, Patrizia Burra6, Umberto Cillo5, Antonio Daniele Pinna1.   

Abstract

A moral liver allocation policy must be fair. We considered a 2-step, 2-principle allocation system called "age mapping." Its first principle, equal opportunity, ensures that candidates of all ages have an equal chance of getting an organ. Its second principle, prudential lifespan equity, allocates younger donor grafts to younger candidates and older donors to older candidates in order to increase the likelihood that all recipients achieve a "full lifespan." Data from 2476 candidates and 1371 consecutive adult liver transplantations (from 1999 to 2012) were used to determine whether age mapping can reduce the gap in years of life lost (YLL) between younger and older recipients. A parametric Weibull prognostic model was developed to estimate total life expectancy after transplantation using survival of the general population matched by sex and age as a reference. Life expectancy from birth was calculated by adding age at transplant and total life expectancy after transplantation. In multivariate analysis, recipient age, hepatitis C virus status, Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score at transplant of >30, and donor age were significantly related to prognosis after surgery (P < 0.05). The mean (and standard deviation) number of years of life from birth, calculated from the current allocation model, for various age groups were: recipients 18-47 years (n = 340) = 65.2 (3.3); 48-55 years (n = 387) = 72.7 (2.1); 56-61 years (n = 372) = 74.7 (1.7) and for recipients >61 years (n = 272) = 77.4 (1.4). The total number of YLL equaled 523 years. Redistributing liver grafts, using an age mapping algorithm, reduces the lifespan gap between younger and older candidates by 33% (from 12.3% to 8.3%) and achieves a 14% overall reduction of YLL (73 years) compared to baseline liver distribution. In conclusion, deliberately incorporating age into an allocation algorithm promotes fairness and increases efficiency.
© 2015 American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26174971     DOI: 10.1002/lt.24211

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


  5 in total

Review 1.  Advances in liver transplantation allocation systems.

Authors:  Michael L Schilsky; Maryam Moini
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2016-03-14       Impact factor: 5.742

Review 2.  Liver transplantation in elderly patients: what do we know at the beginning of 2020?

Authors:  Shimon Dolnikov; René Adam; Daniel Cherqui; Marc Antoine Allard
Journal:  Surg Today       Date:  2020-04-11       Impact factor: 2.549

Review 3.  Transplant of Elderly Patients: Is There an Upper Age Cutoff?

Authors:  Claudia Cottone; Nathalie A Pena Polanco; Kalyan Ram Bhamidimarri
Journal:  Clin Liver Dis       Date:  2020-10-21       Impact factor: 6.126

4.  Morbid obesity increases death and dropout from the liver transplantation waiting list: A prospective cohort study.

Authors:  Claire Delacôte; Mathilde Favre; Medhi El Amrani; Massih Ningarhari; Elise Lemaitre; Line Carolle Ntandja-Wandji; Pierre Bauvin; Emmanuel Boleslawski; Guillaume Millet; Stephanie Truant; Philippe Mathurin; Alexandre Louvet; Valérie Canva; Gilles Lebuffe; François René Pruvot; Sébastien Dharancy; Guillaume Lassailly
Journal:  United European Gastroenterol J       Date:  2022-04-26       Impact factor: 6.866

Review 5.  Surgical management of hepatocellular carcinoma-Western versus Eastern attitude.

Authors:  Flavia Neri; Lorenzo Maroni; Matteo Ravaioli
Journal:  Transl Cancer Res       Date:  2019-04       Impact factor: 1.241

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.