| Literature DB >> 28960723 |
K J Halazun1,2, A A Rana3, B Fortune1,4, R C Quillin2, E C Verna2, B Samstein1,2, J V Guarrera2, T Kato2, A D Griesemer2, A Fox2, R S Brown1,2,4, J C Emond2.
Abstract
Of the 1.6 million patients >70 years of age who died of stroke since 2002, donor livers were retrieved from only 2402 (0.15% yield rate). Despite reports of successful liver transplantation (LT) with elderly grafts (EG), advanced donor age is considered a risk for poor outcomes. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services definitions of an "eligible death" for donation excludes patients >70 years of age, creating disincentives to donation. We investigated utilization and outcomes of recipients of donors >70 through analysis of a United Network for Organ Sharing Standard Transplant Analysis and Research-file of adult LTs from 2002 to 2014. Survival analysis was conducted using Kaplan-Meier curves, and Cox regression was used to identify factors influencing outcomes of EG recipients. Three thousand one hundred four livers from donors >70, ≈40% of which were used in 2 regions: 2 (520/3104) and 9 (666/3104). Unadjusted survival was significantly worse among recipients of EG compared to recipients of younger grafts (P < .0001). Eight independent negative predictors of survival in recipients of EG were identified on multivariable analysis. Survival of low-risk recipients who received EG was significantly better than survival of recipients of younger grafts (P = .04). Outcomes of recipients of EG can therefore be optimized to equal outcomes of younger grafts. Given the large number of stroke deaths in patients >70 years of age, the yield rate of EGs can be maximized and disincentives removed to help resolve the organ shortage crisis.Entities:
Keywords: Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network; clinical research/practice; delayed graft function; donors and donation; geriatrics; liver transplantation/hepatology; organ acceptance; organ procurement and allocation; recipient selection
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28960723 DOI: 10.1111/ajt.14518
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Am J Transplant ISSN: 1600-6135 Impact factor: 8.086