Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
Allocation System (allocation + system)
Kinds of Allocation System Selected AbstractsHepatocellular Carcinoma Patients Are Advantaged in the Current Liver Transplant Allocation SystemAMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 7 2010K. Washburn Patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) within Milan criteria receive priority on the liver transplant waiting list (WL) and compete with non-HCC patients. Dropout from the WL is an indirect measure of transplant access. Competing risks (CR) evaluation of dropout for HCC and non-HCC patients has not previously been reported. Patients listed between 16 March 2005 and 30 June 2008 were included. Probability of dropout was estimated using a CR technique as well as a Cox model for time to dropout. Overall, non-HCC patients had a higher dropout rate from the WL than HCC patients (p < 0.0001). This was reproducible throughout all regions. In Cox regression, tumor size, model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score and alpha fetoprotein (AFP) were associated with increased dropout risk. Multivariable analysis with CR showed that MELD score and AFP, were most influential in predicting dropout for HCC patients. The index of concordance for predicting dropout with the CR was 0.70. HCC patients appear to be advantaged in the current allocation scheme based on lower dropout rates without regard to geography. A continuous score incorporating MELD, AFP and tumor size may help to prioritize HCC patients to better equate dropout rates with non-HCC patients and equalize access. [source] The AST's Perspective on the Proposed Kidney Allocation SystemAMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 7 2009B. Murphy In the present format the proposed new allocation system does not achieve an acceptable balance between justice and equity. [source] Development of the New Lung Allocation System in the United StatesAMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 5p2 2006T. M. Egan This article reviews the development of the new U.S. lung allocation system that took effect in spring 2005. In 1998, the Health Resources and Services Administration of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services published the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) Final Rule. Under the rule, which became effective in 2000, the OPTN had to demonstrate that existing allocation policies met certain conditions or change the policies to meet a range of criteria, including broader geographic sharing of organs, reducing the use of waiting time as an allocation criterion and creating equitable organ allocation systems using objective medical criteria and medical urgency to allocate donor organs for transplant. This mandate resulted in reviews of all organ allocation policies, and led to the creation of the Lung Allocation Subcommittee of the OPTN Thoracic Organ Transplantation Committee. This paper reviews the deliberations of the Subcommittee in identifying priorities for a new lung allocation system, the analyses undertaken by the OPTN and the Scientific Registry for Transplant Recipients and the evolution of a new lung allocation system that ranks candidates for lungs based on a Lung Allocation Score, incorporating waiting list and posttransplant survival probabilities. [source] Health care funding levels and patient outcomes: a national studyHEALTH ECONOMICS, Issue 4 2007Margaret M. Byrne Abstract Background: Health care funding levels differ significantly across geographic regions, but there is little correlation between regional funding levels and outcomes of elderly Medicare beneficiaries. Our goal was to determine whether this relationship holds true in a non-Medicare population cared for in a large integrated health care system with a capitated budget allocation system. Methods: We explored the association between health care funding and risk-adjusted mortality in the 22 Veterans Affairs (VA) geographic Networks over a six-year time period. Allocations to Networks were adjusted for illness burden using Diagnostic Cost Groups. To test the association between funding and risk-adjusted three-year mortality, we ran logistic regressions with single-year patient cohorts, as well as hierarchical regressions on a six year longitudinal data set, clustering on VA Network. Results: A $1000 increase in funding per unit of patient illness burden was associated with a 2,8% reduction in three-year mortality in cross sectional regressions. However, in longitudinal hierarchical regressions clustering on Network, the significant effect of funding level was eliminated. Conclusions: When longitudinal data are used, the significant cross sectional effect of funding levels on mortality disappear. Thus, the factors driving differences in mortality are Network effects, although part of the Network effect may be due to past levels of funding. Our results provide a caution for cross sectional examinations of the association between regional health care funding levels and health outcomes. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [source] Major adverse events, pretransplant assessment and outcome predictionJOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY AND HEPATOLOGY, Issue 11 2009Hui-Chun Huang Abstract Liver cirrhosis and portal hypertension pose enormous loss of lives and resources throughout the world, especially in endemic areas of chronic viral hepatitis. Although the pathophysiology of cirrhosis is not completely understood, the accumulating evidence has paved the way for better control of the complications, including gastroesophageal variceal bleeding, hepatic encephalopathy, ascites, hepatorenal syndrome, hepatopulmonary syndrome and portopulmonary hypertension. Modern pharmacological and interventional therapies have been designed to treat these complications. However, liver transplantation (LT) is the only definite treatment for patients with preterminal end-stage liver disease. To pursue successful LT, the meticulous evaluation of potential recipients and donors is pivotal, especially for living donor transplantation. The critical shortage of cadaveric donor livers is another concern. In many Asian countries, cultural and religious concerns further limit the number of the donors, which lags far behind that of the recipients. The model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) scoring system has recently become the prevailing criterion for organ allocation. Initial results showed clear benefits of moving from the Child,Turcotte,Pugh-based system toward the MELD-based organ allocation system. In addition to the MELD, serum sodium is another important prognostic predictor in patients with advanced cirrhosis. The incorporation of serum sodium into the MELD could enhance the performance of the MELD and could become an indispensable strategy in refining the priority for LT. However, the feasibility of the MELD in combination with sodium in predicting the outcome for patients on transplant waiting list awaits actual outcome data before this becomes standard practice in the Asia,Pacific region. [source] The allocation of prestigious positions in organizational science: accumulative advantage, sponsored mobility, and contest mobilityJOURNAL OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR, Issue 5 2005C. Chet Miller More than 200 freshly minted doctoral graduates enter the field of organization science every year. A non-trivial number of existing faculty members move from one university to another every year, while other organization science faculty leave academia to enter retirement, consulting, or industry. Despite the importance of this large, complex system of entries and exits, few attempts have been made to explicitly understand how the system works. Drawing upon sociology of science and careers research, we studied the underlying form of the position allocation system by focusing on the relative importance of research success and prior affiliations as antecedents of movement and stability across positions. We used three theoretical models: accumulative advantage, sponsored mobility, and contest mobility. Tracking hundreds of faculty members for 16 years post doctorate, we find a downward cascading of affiliation prestige over time that affects people more dramatically and quickly than we expected, especially women. Accumulative advantage, the most predictive of our models, does help to maintain relative but not absolute prestige, at least until its effects wane in later years of the career. These findings are relevant to scholars interested in the sociology of science, organization scholars interested in the underlying dynamics of their discipline, and individuals making career choices. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [source] A comparison of liver transplantation outcomes in the pre- vs.ALIMENTARY PHARMACOLOGY & THERAPEUTICS, Issue 2 2005post-MELD eras Summary Background:, The model for end stage liver disease (MELD)-based organ allocation system is designed to prioritize orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) for patients with the most severe liver disease. However, there are no published data to confirm whether this goal has been achieved or whether the policy has affected long-term post-OLT survival. Aim:, To compare pre-OLT liver disease severity and long-term (1 year) post-OLT survival between the pre- and post-MELD eras. Methods:, Using the United Network of Organ Sharing database, we compared two cohorts of adult patients undergoing cadaveric liver transplant in the pre-MELD (n = 3857) and post-MELD (n = 4245) eras. We created multivariable models to determine differences in: (i) pre-OLT liver disease severity as measured by MELD; and (ii) 1-year post-OLT outcomes. Results:, Patients undergoing OLT in the post-MELD era had more severe liver disease at the time of transplantation (mean MELD = 20.5) vs. those in the pre-MELD era (mean MELD = 17.0). There were no differences in the unadjusted patient or graft survival at 1 year post-OLT. This difference remained insignificant after adjusting for a range of prespecified recipient, donor, and transplant centre-related factors in multivariable survival analysis. Conclusions:, Although liver disease severity is higher in the post- vs. pre-MELD era, there has been no change in long-term post-OLT patient or graft survival. These results indicate that the MELD era has achieved its primary goals by allocating cadaveric livers to the sickest patients without compromising post-OLT survival. [source] Liver transplantation in the era of model for end-stage liver diseaseLIVER INTERNATIONAL, Issue 1 2004Victor S. Wang Abstract: Liver transplantation is challenged by organ shortage and prolonged waiting list time. The goal of the ideal organ allocation system is to transplant individuals least likely to survive without a liver transplantation, and maintain appropriate rates of postoperative survival. Currently, liver allocation in the United States is based on the model for end-stage liver disease (MELD). Studies have shown MELD to be objective and accurate in predicting short-term survival in patients with cirrhosis. [source] Impact of preoperative overt hepatic encephalopathy on neurocognitive function after liver transplantation,,LIVER TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 2 2009Eva U. Sotil In the current Model for End-Stage Liver Disease allocation system, patients are at risk of suffering repeated episodes of hepatic encephalopathy (HE) while waiting for an orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT); the posttransplantation impact of these episodes has not been well explored. We evaluated the cognitive function and quality of life in a group of OLT recipients (n = 25) who had suffered from overt HE prior to their procedure (HE-PreLT group) and compared their performance to that of a similar group of patients (n = 14) without overt HE (No HE-PreLT group) as well as to controls. Patients were selected from a cohort of 280 patients who underwent OLT during this period; the presence of clinical confounders excluded many of the remaining subjects. Demographic and clinical characteristics were balanced among groups. At an average of 18 months after OLT, we administered 2 neuropsychological batteries [Psychometric Hepatic Encephalopathy Score (PHES) test battery and Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS)]; a pyschophysiological test (critical flicker frequency); and the SF-36 quality of life score. The HE-PreLT group scored below controls in 5 of 6 cognitive domains tested by RBANS, 3 of 6 PHES subtests, as well as the critical flicker frequency test. The No HE-PreLT group scored below the controls in 1 of the 6 cognitive domains tested by RBANS. The more severe neurocognitive abnormalities seen in the HE-PreLT group did not appear to affect quality of life, as lower values than normative data were only found in 1 of the 8 SF-36 scales. In conclusion, neurocognitive abnormalities were more severe in liver transplant recipients that had suffered from overt HE prior to OLT. Prospective studies of neurocognitive function pre-OLT and post-OLT are needed to fully determine the impact of such abnormalities. Liver Transpl 15:184,192, 2009. © 2009 AASLD. [source] Outcome of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma listed for liver transplantation within the Eurotransplant allocation system,LIVER TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 4 2008Michael Adler Although hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has become a recognized indication for liver transplantation, the rules governing priority and access to the waiting list are not well defined. Patient- and tumor-related variables were evaluated in 226 patients listed primarily for HCC in Belgium, a region where the allocation system is patient-driven, priority being given to sicker patients, based on the Child-Turcotte-Pugh (CTP) score. Intention-to-treat and posttransplantation survival rates at 4 years were 56.5 and 66%, respectively, and overall HCC recurrence rate was 10%. The most significant predictors of failure to receive a transplant in due time were baseline CTP score equal to or above 9 (relative risk [RR] 4.1; confidence interval [CI]: 1.7,9.9) and , fetoprotein above 100 ng/mL (RR 3.0; CI: 1.2,7.1). Independent predictors of posttransplantation mortality were age equal to or above 50 years (RR 2.5; CI: 1.0,3.7) and United Network for Organ Sharing pathological tumor nodule metastasis above the Milan criteria (RR 2.1; CI: 1.0,5.9). Predictors of recurrence (10%) were , fetoprotein above 100 ng/mL (RR 3.2; CI:1.1,10) and vascular involvement of the tumor on the explant (RR 3.6; CI: 1.1,11.3). Assessing the value of the pretransplantation staging by imaging compared to explant pathology revealed 34% accuracy, absence of carcinoma in 8.3%, overstaging in 36.2%, and understaging in 10.4%. Allocation rules for HCC should consider not only tumor characteristics but also the degree of liver impairment. Patients older than 50 years with a stage above the Milan criteria at transplantation have a poorer prognosis after transplantation. Liver Transpl 14:526,533, 2008. © 2008 AASLD. [source] The impact of serum sodium concentration on mortality after liver transplantation: A cohort multicenter study,LIVER TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 8 2007Muhammad F. Dawwas Modification of the current allocation system for donor livers in the United States to incorporate recipient serum sodium concentration ([Na]) has recently been proposed. However, the impact of this parameter on posttransplantation mortality has not been previously examined in a large risk-adjusted analysis. We assessed the effect of recipient [Na] on the survival of all adults with chronic liver disease who received a first single organ liver transplant in the UK and Ireland during the period March 1, 1994 to March 31, 2005 (n = 5,152) at 3 years, during the first 90 days, and beyond the first 90 days, adjusting for a wide range of recipient, donor, and graft characteristics. Compared to those with normal [Na] (135,145 meq/L; n = 3,066), severely hyponatremic recipients ([Na] <130 meq/L, n = 541), had a higher risk-adjusted mortality at 3 years (hazard ratio [HR] 1.28; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04,1.59; P < 0.02). The excess mortality was, however, confined to the first 90 days (HR 1.55; 95% CI, 1.18,2.04; P < 0.002) with no significant difference thereafter. This was also true for hypernatremic recipients ([Na] >145 meq/L, n = 81), who had an even greater risk-adjusted mortality compared to normonatremic recipients (overall: HR 1.85; 95% CI, 1.25,2.73; P < 0.002; ,90 days: HR 2.29; 95% CI, 1.42,3.70; P < 0.001; >90 days: HR 1.12; 95% CI, 0.55,2.29; P = 0.8), whereas mildly hyponatremic recipients ([Na] 130,134 meq/L, n = 1,127) had similar risk-adjusted mortality to those with normal [Na] at the same time points. In conclusion, recipient [Na] is an independent predictor of death following liver transplantation. Attempts to correct the [Na] toward the normal reference range are an important aspect of pretransplantation management. Liver Transpl 13:1115,1124, 2007. © 2007 AASLD. [source] Reply: Towards a better liver transplant allocation systemLIVER TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 6 2007George N. Ioannou MD [source] Summary report of a national conference: Evolving concepts in liver allocation in the MELD and PELD eraLIVER TRANSPLANTATION, Issue S10 2004Kim M. Olthoff A national conference was held to review and assess data gathered since implementation of MELD and PELD and determine future directions. The objectives of the conference were to review the current system of liver allocation with a critical analysis of its strengths and weaknesses. Conference participants used an evidence-based approach to consider whether predicted outcome after transplantation should influence allocation, to discuss the concept of minimal listing score, to revisit current and potential expansion of exception criteria, and to determine whether specific scores should be used for automatic removal of patients on the waiting list. After review of data from the first 18 months since implementation, association and society leaders, and surgeons and hepatologists with wide regional representation were invited to participate in small group discussions focusing on each of the main objectives. At the completion of the meeting, there was agreement that MELD has had a successful initial implementation, meeting the goal of providing a system of allocation that emphasizes the urgency of the candidate while diminishing the reliance on waiting time, and that it has proven to be a powerful tool for auditing the liver allocation system. It was also agreed that the data regarding the accuracy of PELD as a predictor of pretransplant mortality were less conclusive and that PELD should be considered in isolation. Recommendations for the transplant community, based on the analysis of the MELD data, were discussed and are presented in the summary document. (Liver Transpl 2004;10:A6,A22.) [source] Retransplantation for recurrent hepatitis C in the MELD era: Maximizing utilityLIVER TRANSPLANTATION, Issue S10 2004James R. Burton Jr. Key Points 1Retransplantation (re-LT) for hepatitis C virus (HCV) recurrence is controversial. Although re-LT accounts for 10% of all liver transplants (LTs), the number of patients requiring re-LT is expected to grow as primary LT recipients survive long enough to develop graft failure from recurrent disease. 2Utility, as applied to the medical ethics of transplantation, refers to allocating organs to those individuals who will make the best use of them. The utility function (U) of liver transplantation is represented by the product of outcome (O = 1-year survival with LT) times emergency (E = 3-month mortality without LT), i.e., U = O × E. 3For primary LT, maximal U is achieved by allocating organs at the highest model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score (i.e., "sickest first"). No significant differences exist between HCV and non-HCV diagnoses. 4For re-LT, maximal utility for HCV and non-HCV diagnoses are achieved at MELD scores of 21 and 24, respectively. Utility starts to decline at MELD scores above 28. 5The current allocation system (MELD) fails to maximize utility with regard to re-LT. (Liver Transpl 2004;10:S59,S64.) [source] Redrawing organ distribution boundaries: Results of a computer-simulated analysis for liver transplantationLIVER TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 8 2002Richard B. Freeman MD For several years, the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network/United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) Liver and Intestinal Transplantation Committee has been examining effects of changes and proposed changes to the liver allocation system. The Institute of Medicine recently recommended that the size of liver distribution units be increased to improve the organ distribution system. Methods to achieve this and the potential impact on patients and transplant centers of such a change are evaluated in this study. In hypothetical scenarios, we combined geographically contiguous organ procurement organizations (OPOs) in seven different configurations to increase the size of liver distribution units to cover populations greater than 9 million persons. Using the UNOS Liver Allocation Model (ULAM), we examined the effect of 17 different organ allocation sequences in these proposed realignments and compared them with those predicted by ULAM for the current liver distribution system by using the following primary outcome variables: number of primary liver transplantations performed, total number of deaths, and total number of life-years saved. Every proposed new liver distribution unit plan resulted in fewer primary transplantations. Many policies increased the total number of deaths and reduced total life-years saved compared with the current system. Most of the proposed plans reduced interregional variation compared with the current plan, but no one plan consistently reduced variation for all outcome variables, and all reductions in variations were relatively small. All new liver distribution unit plans led to significant shifts in the number of transplantations performed in individual OPOs compared with the current system. The ULAM predicts that changing liver distribution units to larger geographic areas has little positive impact on overall results of liver transplantation in the United States compared with the current plan. Enlarging liver distribution units likely will result in significant shifts in organs across current OPO boundaries, which will have a significant impact on the activity of many transplant centers. [source] Pediatric living donor lobar lung transplantationPEDIATRIC TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 7 2006Stuart C. Sweet Abstract:, Living donor lobar lung transplantation (LDLLT) was developed in order to mitigate the growing competition for deceased donor (DD) lungs and resultant increase in waiting list mortality. Because each of the two donor lobes serves as an entire lung for the recipient, donors who are taller than the recipient are preferred. Therefore LDLLT is particularly well suited for pediatric recipients for whom adults serve as donors. Although long-term outcomes after LDLLT reported by the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) are worse compared with DD recipients, overall pediatric outcomes as well as single center reports from the most experienced programs are more promising. Particularly encouraging are the findings that bronchiolitis obliterans (OB) is less frequent or less severe in LDLLT recipients in comparison to DD recipients. Moreover, outcomes may be improved by careful selection of donors to ensure adequately sized donor lobes and minimization of infectious risks. Although no donor deaths have been reported, there is a moderate risk of significant short-term complications. Long-term follow-up has not been reported. The use of LDLLT has decreased in recent years, and the recent change by the OPTN to an urgency/benefit allocation system for DD lungs in patients 12 yr and older may further reduce the demand. Nonetheless, we anticipate that LDLLT will continue to be utilized in select circumstances, particularly in children under 12 where access to DD organs remains challenging. [source] Anreizkompatibilität als zentrales Element eines neu gestalteten GesundheitsmarktesPERSPEKTIVEN DER WIRTSCHAFTSPOLITIK, Issue 3 2004Thomas Gries Frequently, administrative rules defined by the government or private health (doctor) associations dominate the allocation mechanisms of the health system. These administrative rules along with asymmetric information often cause moral hazard problems leading to vast inefficiencies in the ,Physician-Patient-Market". Therefore, the discussion of efficient health systems should focus on the problem of compatible incentives within the allocation system of the health sector. Even more, without incentive consistency instruments recently suggested to cure the inefficiency of the German system like ,Managed Care", ,Disease Management" or ,Diagnosis Related Groups" will not be able to improve the efficiency of the health system. Introducing these instruments without a full incentive , compatible allocation system covering all segments of the health system will just shift the problem of asymmetric information and moral hazard to another sub-market of the system, the ,Health Insurance,Patient-Market". Therefore, the intention of the paper is to identify the major elements of a suitable incentive , compatible allocation scheme for the health market. Further, we propose an independent evaluation and information institution as a major tool to cure the problem of asymmetric information in the health market. [source] Reforming Budget Systems in Countries of the Former Soviet UnionPUBLIC ADMINISTRATION REVIEW, Issue 5 2001John L. Mikesell The countries of the former Soviet Union (FSU) required considerable revision to their budget processes and procedures to establish systems consistent with transformation from controlled dependencies within a larger planned economy to independent governments of fledgling market-oriented democracies. This article considers the degree to which preexisting, reforming, and reformed budget systems in FSU countries deliver the basic expectations of a public sector resource allocation system. Evidence indicates failures to realign budgeting and finance systems designed for command and control environments to the demands of more market based economic systems, with effects often magnified by the hybrid economies of these transitional states. Significant difficulties and shortcomings in the ability of existing systems to perform basic public sector allocation, management, and control functions are the result, but some countries are ahead of others and their experience can guide reforms across the FSU. [source] The AJT Report: News and issues that affect organ and tissue transplantationAMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 6 2010SUE PONDROM This month "The AJT Report" takes a look at a new policy in the works for the U.S. organ allocation system, and reviews a lawsuit that challenges the constitutionality of NOTA's ban on compensation for bone marrow donors, which could influence solid organ donation policy. [source] Lung Transplantation in the United States, 1999,2008AMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 4p2 2010R. D. Yusen This article highlights trends and changes in lung and heart,lung transplantation in the United States from 1999 to 2008. While adult lung transplantation grew significantly over the past decade, rates of heart,lung and pediatric lung transplantation have remained low. Since implementation of the lung allocation score (LAS) donor allocation system in 2005, decreases in the number of active waiting list patients, waiting times for lung transplantation and death rates on the waiting list have occurred. However, characteristics of recipients transplanted in the LAS era differed from those transplanted earlier. The proportion of candidates undergoing lung transplantation for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease decreased, while increasing for those with pulmonary fibrosis. In the LAS era, older, sicker and previously transplanted candidates underwent transplantation more frequently compared with the previous era. Despite these changes, when compared with the pre-LAS era, 1-year survival after lung transplantation did not significantly change after LAS inception. The long-term effects of the change in the characteristics of lung transplant recipients on overall outcomes for lung transplantation remain unknown. Continued surveillance and refinements to the LAS system will affect the distribution and types of candidates transplanted and hopefully lead to improved system efficiency and outcomes. [source] Calculated PRA (CPRA): The New Measure of Sensitization for Transplant CandidatesAMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 1 2010J. M. Cecka The ways we measure whether a patient is sensitized to HLA antigens and to what extent sensitization affects access to transplantation have changed remarkably during the past decade. What we mean by sensitized and broadly sensitized today is heavily dependent upon the sensitivity of the test that is used to measure antibodies. Because we provide additional allocation points for broadly sensitized patients in the United States kidney allocation system in an effort to compensate for their biological disadvantage, some consistency and accountability are required. The calculated panel-reactive antibody, which provides an estimate of the percentage of deceased organ donors that will be crossmatch incompatible for a candidate provides both consistency and accountability. [source] The AJT Report: News and issues that affect organ and tissue transplantationAMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 9 2009SUE PONDROM This month, The AJT Report reviews programs designed to transition adolescent transplant patients to adult care, as well as the heart allocation system and a new approach to double-lung transplant. [source] The AST's Perspective on the Proposed Kidney Allocation SystemAMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 7 2009B. Murphy In the present format the proposed new allocation system does not achieve an acceptable balance between justice and equity. [source] Balancing Multiple and Conflicting Allocation Goals: A Logical Path ForwardAMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 7 2009P. G. Stock A potential strategy for a new allocation system for kidney allocation should match predicted longevity of the donor kidney with predicted survival of the transplant recipient, while balancing the disparate goals of the multiple stakeholders. [source] Lung Transplantation in the United States, 1998,2007AMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 4p2 2009K. R. McCurry This article highlights trends and changes in lung and heart-lung transplantation in the United States from 1998 to 2007. The most significant change over the last decade was implementation of the Lung Allocation Score (LAS) allocation system in May 2005. Subsequently, the number of active wait-listed lung candidates declined 54% from pre-LAS (2004) levels to the end of 2007; there was also a reduction in median waiting time, from 792 days in 2004 to 141 days in 2007. The number of lung transplants performed yearly increased through the decade to a peak of 1 465 in 2007; the greatest single year increase occurred in 2005. Despite candidates with increasingly higher LAS scores being transplanted in the LAS era, recipient death rates have remained relatively stable since 2003 and better than in previous years. Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis became the most common diagnosis group to receive a lung transplant in 2007 while emphysema was the most common diagnosis in previous years. The number of retransplants and transplants in those aged ,65 performed yearly have increased significantly since 1998, up 295% and 643%, respectively. A decreasing percentage of lung transplant recipients are children (3.5% in 2007, n = 51). With LAS refinement ongoing, monitoring of future impact is warranted. [source] Development of the New Lung Allocation System in the United StatesAMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 5p2 2006T. M. Egan This article reviews the development of the new U.S. lung allocation system that took effect in spring 2005. In 1998, the Health Resources and Services Administration of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services published the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) Final Rule. Under the rule, which became effective in 2000, the OPTN had to demonstrate that existing allocation policies met certain conditions or change the policies to meet a range of criteria, including broader geographic sharing of organs, reducing the use of waiting time as an allocation criterion and creating equitable organ allocation systems using objective medical criteria and medical urgency to allocate donor organs for transplant. This mandate resulted in reviews of all organ allocation policies, and led to the creation of the Lung Allocation Subcommittee of the OPTN Thoracic Organ Transplantation Committee. This paper reviews the deliberations of the Subcommittee in identifying priorities for a new lung allocation system, the analyses undertaken by the OPTN and the Scientific Registry for Transplant Recipients and the evolution of a new lung allocation system that ranks candidates for lungs based on a Lung Allocation Score, incorporating waiting list and posttransplant survival probabilities. [source] Evaluating Options for Utility-Based Kidney AllocationAMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 7 2009D. L. Segev Over the last 5 years, a number of utility-based allocation systems have been proposed in an effort to increase the life-prolonging potential of deceased donor kidneys in the United States. These have included various adaptations of age-matching and net benefit, including the Eurotransplant Senior Program, Life Years From Transplant, and several systems for avoiding extreme donor/recipient mismatch. However, utility-based allocation is complex and raises issues regarding choice of metric, appropriateness of certain factors for use in allocation, accuracy of prediction models, transparency and perception, and possible effects on donation rates. Changing the role of utility in kidney allocation will likely cause changes to efficiency, equity, predictability, autonomy, controversy, trust and live donation. In this manuscript, various allocation systems are discussed, and a framework is proposed for quantifying the goals of the transplant community and evaluating options for utility-based kidney allocation in this context. [source] Development of the New Lung Allocation System in the United StatesAMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 5p2 2006T. M. Egan This article reviews the development of the new U.S. lung allocation system that took effect in spring 2005. In 1998, the Health Resources and Services Administration of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services published the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) Final Rule. Under the rule, which became effective in 2000, the OPTN had to demonstrate that existing allocation policies met certain conditions or change the policies to meet a range of criteria, including broader geographic sharing of organs, reducing the use of waiting time as an allocation criterion and creating equitable organ allocation systems using objective medical criteria and medical urgency to allocate donor organs for transplant. This mandate resulted in reviews of all organ allocation policies, and led to the creation of the Lung Allocation Subcommittee of the OPTN Thoracic Organ Transplantation Committee. This paper reviews the deliberations of the Subcommittee in identifying priorities for a new lung allocation system, the analyses undertaken by the OPTN and the Scientific Registry for Transplant Recipients and the evolution of a new lung allocation system that ranks candidates for lungs based on a Lung Allocation Score, incorporating waiting list and posttransplant survival probabilities. [source] | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||