Literature DB >> 26782280

[Allocation systems in transplantation medicine: Advantages and disadvantages].

J Gottlieb1, W Gwinner2, C P Strassburg3,4.   

Abstract

Donor organs for transplantations are a scarce commodity; therefore, allocation systems are needed that guarantee an ethically acceptable distribution to patients on the waiting list (equal treatment and fairness) but also take the probability of survival of the transplant in each recipient into consideration. In this article the allocation systems for lung, liver, kidney and pancreas transplants are presented.For lung transplantations an allocation system based on the lung allocation score (LAS) is currently used. The LAS predicts the probability of survival on the waiting list and the survival rate following transplantation. Organs with a limited range of utilization are distributed in a so-called mini-match procedure.For post-mortem kidney and pancreas transplantations a relatively complex but transparent allocation system has been created in which patients are subdivided into groups, each of which has its own allocation rules. The allocation is principally carried out according to criteria of fairness of distribution and according to the prospects of success. The probability of a mismatch also plays a role. The urgency is important for children and for patients who do not have the possibility of dialysis. Combined pancreas and kidney transplantations have priority over kidney transplantations alone.The criterion for the urgency of liver transplantation in Germany is currently the model for end-stage liver disease (MELD), which aims to reduce the waiting list mortality and to prioritize transplantations for those most in need. Because the system insufficiently describes the priority of transplantation for patients with tumors or genetic liver diseases, there is an additional set of rules for so-called standard exceptions.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Graft survival; Kidney transplantation; Liver transplantation; Lung transplantation; Pancreas transplantation

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26782280     DOI: 10.1007/s00108-015-3805-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Internist (Berl)        ISSN: 0020-9554            Impact factor:   0.743


  29 in total

1.  Introduction of the lung allocation score in Germany.

Authors:  J Gottlieb; M Greer; U Sommerwerck; T Deuse; C Witt; R Schramm; C Hagl; M Strueber; J M Smits
Journal:  Am J Transplant       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 8.086

Review 2.  Clinical epidemiology of cardiovascular disease in chronic renal disease.

Authors:  R N Foley; P S Parfrey; M J Sarnak
Journal:  Am J Kidney Dis       Date:  1998-11       Impact factor: 8.860

3.  Impact of MELD on short-term and long-term outcome following liver transplantation: a European perspective.

Authors:  Evi Nagler; Hans Van Vlierberghe; Isabelle Colle; Roberto Troisi; Bernard de Hemptinne
Journal:  Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 2.566

4.  [Surgical aspects of orthotopic, human liver transplantation. Experiences of 3 liver transplantations].

Authors:  A Gütgemann; G Esser; T S Lie; K H Schriefers
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  1971-04       Impact factor: 0.955

5.  Multicentric evaluation of model for end-stage liver disease-based allocation and survival after liver transplantation in Germany--limitations of the 'sickest first'-concept.

Authors:  Tobias J Weismüller; Panagiotis Fikatas; Jan Schmidt; Ana P Barreiros; Gerd Otto; Susanne Beckebaum; Andreas Paul; Markus N Scherer; Hartmut H Schmidt; Hans J Schlitt; Peter Neuhaus; Jürgen Klempnauer; Johann Pratschke; Michael P Manns; Christian P Strassburg
Journal:  Transpl Int       Date:  2010-09-03       Impact factor: 3.782

6.  The early days of transplantation.

Authors:  T E Starzl
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1994-12-07       Impact factor: 56.272

Review 7.  The model for end-stage liver disease (MELD).

Authors:  Patrick S Kamath; W Ray Kim
Journal:  Hepatology       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 17.425

8.  Multicenter analysis of kidney preservation.

Authors:  Gerhard Opelz; Bernd Döhler
Journal:  Transplantation       Date:  2007-02-15       Impact factor: 4.939

Review 9.  A model to predict survival in patients with end-stage liver disease.

Authors:  P S Kamath; R H Wiesner; M Malinchoc; W Kremers; T M Therneau; C L Kosberg; G D'Amico; E R Dickson; W R Kim
Journal:  Hepatology       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 17.425

10.  Impact of the MELD score on waiting time and disease severity in liver transplantation in United States veterans.

Authors:  Jawad Ahmad; Kathy K Downey; Mohamed Akoad; Thomas V Cacciarelli
Journal:  Liver Transpl       Date:  2007-11       Impact factor: 5.799

View more
  1 in total

Review 1.  Systematic Review of Public Preferences for the Allocation of Donor Organs for Transplantation: Principles of Distributive Justice.

Authors:  Carina Oedingen; Tim Bartling; Axel C Mühlbacher; Harald Schrem; Christian Krauth
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2019-10       Impact factor: 3.883

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.