Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
List Mortality (list + mortality)
Kinds of List Mortality Selected AbstractsEffect of body mass index on the survival benefit of liver transplantation,LIVER TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 12 2007Shawn J. Pelletier Obese patients are at higher risk for morbidity and mortality after liver transplantation (LT) than nonobese recipients. However, there are no reports assessing the survival benefit of LT according to recipient body mass index (BMI). A retrospective cohort of liver transplant candidates who were initially wait-listed between September 2001 and December 2004 was identified in the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients database. Adjusted Cox regression models were fitted to assess the association between BMI and liver transplant survival benefit (posttransplantation vs. waiting list mortality). During the study period, 25,647 patients were placed on the waiting list. Of these, 4,488 (17%) underwent LT by December 31, 2004. At wait-listing and transplantation, similar proportions were morbidly obese (BMI , 40; 3.8% vs. 3.4%, respectively) and underweight (BMI < 20; 4.5% vs. 4.0%, respectively). Underweight patients experienced a significantly higher covariate-adjusted risk of death on the waiting list (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.61; P < 0.0001) compared to normal weight candidates (BMI 20 to <25), but underweight recipients had a similar risk of posttransplantation death (HR = 1.28; P = 0.15) compared to recipients of normal weight. In conclusion, compared to patients on the waiting list with a similar BMI, all subgroups of liver transplant recipients demonstrated a significant (P < 0.0001) survival benefit, including morbidly obese and underweight recipients. Our results suggest that high or low recipient BMI should not be a contraindication for LT. Liver Transpl, 2007. © 2007 AASLD. [source] MELD,Moving steadily towards equality, equity, and fairnessLIVER TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 5 2005James Neuberger Background and aims: A consensus has been reached that liver donor allocation should be based primarily on liver disease severity and that waiting time should not be a major determining factor. Our aim was to assess the capability of the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score to correctly rank potential liver recipients according to their severity of liver disease and mortality risk on the OPTN liver waiting list. Methods: The MELD model predicts liver disease severity based on serum creatinine, serum total bilirubin, and INR and has been shown to be useful in predicting mortality in patients with compensated and decompensated cirrhosis. In this study, we prospectively applied the MELD score to estimate 3-month mortality to 3437 adult liver transplant candidates with chronic liver disease who were added to the OPTN waiting list at 2A or 2B status between November, 1999, and December, 2001. Results: In this study cohort with chronic liver disease, 412 (12%) died during the 3-month follow-up period. Waiting list mortality increased directly in proportion to the listing MELD score. Patients having a MELD score <9 experienced a 1.9% mortality, whereas patients having a MELD score > or =40 had a mortality rate of 71.3%. Using the c-statistic with 3-month mortality as the end point, the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve for the MELD score was 0.83 compared with 0.76 for the Child-Turcotte-Pugh (CTP) score (P < 0.001). Conclusions: These data suggest that the MELD score is able to accurately predict 3-month mortality among patients with chronic liver disease on the liver waiting list and can be applied for allocation of donor livers.(Gastroenterology 2003;124:91,96.) Context: The Model for Endstage Liver Disease (MELD) score serves as the basis for the distribution of deceased-donor (DD) livers and was developed in response to "the final rule" mandate, whose stated principle is to allocate livers according to a patient's medical need, with less emphasis on keeping organs in the local procurement area. However, in selected areas of the United States, organs are kept in organ procurement organizations (OPOs) with small waiting lists and transplanted into less-sick patients instead of being allocated to sicker patients in nearby transplant centers in OPOs with large waiting lists. Objective: To determine whether there is a difference in MELD scores for liver transplant recipients receiving transplants in small vs large OPOs. Design and setting: Retrospective review of the US Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients between February 28, 2002, and March 31, 2003. Transplant recipients (N = 4798) had end-stage liver disease and received DD livers. Main outcome measures: MELD score distribution (range, 6,40), graft survival, and patient survival for liver transplant recipients in small (<100) and large (> or =100 on the waiting list) OPOs. RESULTS: The distribution of MELD scores was the same in large and small OPOs; 92% had a MELD score of 18 or less, 7% had a MELD score between 19 and 24, and only 2% of listed patients had a MELD score higher than 24 (P = .85). The proportion of patients receiving transplants in small OPOs and with a MELD score higher than 24 was significantly lower than that in large OPOs (19% vs 49%; P<.001). Patient survival rates at 1 year after transplantation for small OPOs (86.4%) and large OPOs (86.6%) were not statistically different (P = .59), and neither were graft survival rates in small OPOs (80.1%) and large OPOs (81.3%) (P = .80). Conclusions: There is a significant disparity in MELD scores in liver transplant recipients in small vs large OPOs; fewer transplant recipients in small OPOs have severe liver disease (MELD score >24). This disparity does not reflect the stated goals of the current allocation policy, which is to distribute livers according to a patient's medical need, with less emphasis on keeping organs in the local procurement area. (JAMA 2004;291:1871,1874.) [source] Combined orthotopic heart and liver transplantation: The need for exception status listing1,LIVER TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 12 2004Paige M. Porrett Through May 2004, 33 combined orthotopic heart-liver transplants (OHT/OLT) have been performed nationwide. No published data exist to date regarding outcomes of patients awaiting such transplants, although progression of two organ disease processes may contribute to premature death for waiting patients. Retrospective data were collected on patients listed for combined OHT/OLT from both an individual tertiary care transplant center and the national UNOS registry to delineate listing criteria and evaluate patient outcomes in both the pre- and post-MELD eras. All patients who survived to transplantation or died on the waiting list were included in the analysis. Results show that 29.6% of patients registered nationally and 42% of patients listed institutionally survived to transplantation. Survival to transplantation was associated with less severe liver disease, though patients with MELD scores ranging from 19 to 26 had significantly higher wait list mortality than expected when compared to single-organ liver transplants. Following combined orthotopic heart-liver transplantation, 80% and 70% of patients survive 1 and 3 years, respectively. In conclusion, combined OHT/OLT is a successful therapy, but current organ allocation policies may not ensure expeditious transplantation in critically ill patients with dual vital organ failure. Providing exception status listing to these patients would ensure more expeditious transplantation and potentially contribute to improved survival. (Liver Transpl 2004;10:1539,1544.) [source] Impact of donor infections on outcome of orthotopic liver transplantationLIVER TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 5 2003Michael Angelis Infection occurs when microbial agents enter the host, either through airborne transmission or by direct contact of a substance carrying the infectious agent with the host. Human body fluids, solid organs, or other tissues often are ideal vectors to support microbial agents and can transmit infections efficiently from donor to recipient. In the case of blood transfusion and tissue transplantation, the main consequence of such a transmission is infection of the recipient. However, in the case of solid-organ transplantation, and particularly for liver transplantation, donor infections are not only transmitted to the recipient, the donor infection also may affect the donated liver's preservability and subsequent function in the recipient irrespective of the systemic consequences of the infection. In addition, solid organ recipients of infected organs are less able to respond to the infectious agent because of their immunosuppressive treatment. Thus, transmission of infections from organ donor to liver recipient represents serious potential risks that must be weighed against a candidate's mortality risk without the transplant. However, the ever-increasing gap between the number of donors and those waiting for liver grafts makes consideration of every potential donor, regardless of the infection status, essential to minimize waiting list mortality. In this review, we will focus on assessing the risk of transmission of bacterial, fungal, viral, and parasitic infectious agents from cadaveric liver donors to recipients and the effect such a transmission has on liver function, morbidity, and mortality. We will also discuss risk-benefit deliberations for using organs from infected donors for certain types of recipients. These issues are critically important to maximize the use of donated organs but also minimize recipient morbidity and graft dysfunction. [source] Size reduction of donor organs in pediatric lung transplantationPEDIATRIC TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 3 2010Carsten Mueller Mueller C, Hansen G, Ballmann M, Schwerk N, Simon AR, Goerler H, Strueber M. Size reduction of donor organs in pediatric lung transplantation. Pediatr Transplantation 2010:14: 364,368. © 2009 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Abstract:, Lobar transplantation and peripheral segmental resection allow downsizing of larger lungs for use in smaller recipients, particularly with regard to pediatric patients on the high urgency waiting list. We studied the safety and outcome of these techniques in children. All pediatric patients who underwent reduced size LTx between January 2000 and March 2009 were retrospectively reviewed and compared with pediatric patients who underwent full size LTx during the same period. Patient characteristics, intra-operative variables, and post-operative morbidity and mortality were compared. Among 28 primary LTxs, 16 (57%) were performed in reduced size technique. Preoperatively, there was a trend toward a higher rate of mechanical ventilation and a higher capillary pCO2 in the reduced size group. Surgical procedures tended to be longer in that group. Post-operative complications, survival and functional parameters were comparable between both groups. Our study demonstrates that reduced size LTx in children is a reliable therapeutic option that provides results comparable to full size LTx. This technique might help to reduce waiting list mortality by expanding the donor pool in pediatric LTx. [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] Intestine Transplantation in the United States, 1999,2008AMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 4p2 2010G. V. Mazariegos Improving short-term results with intestine transplantation have allowed more patients to benefit with nearly 700 patients alive in the United States with a functioning allograft at the end of 2007. This success has led to an increase in demand. Time to transplant and waiting list mortality have significantly improved over the decade, but mortality remains high, especially for infants and adults with concomitant liver failure. The approximately 200 intestines recovered annually from deceased donors represent less than 3% of donors who have at least one organ recovered. Consent practice varies widely by OPTN region. Opportunities for improving intestine recovery and utilization include improving consent rates and standardizing donor selection criteria. One-year patient and intestine graft survival is 89% and 79% for intestine-only recipients and 72% and 69% for liver-intestine recipients, respectively. By 10 years, patient and intestine survival falls to 46% and 29% for intestine-only recipients, and 42% and 39% for liver-intestine, respectively. Immunosuppression practice employs peri-operative antibody induction therapy in 60% of cases; acute rejection is reported in 30%,40% of recipients at one year. Data on long-term nutritional outcomes and morbidities are limited, while the cause and therapy for late graft loss from chronic rejection are areas of ongoing investigation. [source] Heart Transplantation in the United States, 1999,2008AMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 4p2 2010M. R. Johnson This article features 1999,2008 trends in heart transplantation, as seen in data from the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) and the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR). Despite a 32% decline in actively listed candidates over the decade, there was a 20% increase from 2007 to 2008. There continues to be an increase in listed candidates diagnosed with congenital heart disease or retransplantation. The proportion of patients listed as Status 1A and 1B continues to increase, with a decrease in Status 2 listings. Waiting list mortality decreased from 2000 through 2007, but increased 18% from 2007 to 2008; despite the increase in waiting list death rates in 2008, waiting list mortality for Status 1A and Status 1B continues to decrease. Recipient numbers have varied by 10% over the past decade, with an increased proportion of transplants performed in infants and patients above 65 years of age. Despite the increase in Status 1A and Status 1B recipients at transplant, posttransplant survival has continued to improve. With the rise in infant candidates for transplantation and their high waiting list mortality, better means of supporting infants in need of transplant and allocation of organs to infant candidates is clearly needed. [source] Survival Benefit-Based Deceased-Donor Liver AllocationAMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 4p2 2009D. E. Schaubel Currently, patients awaiting deceased-donor liver transplantation are prioritized by medical urgency. Specifically, wait-listed chronic liver failure patients are sequenced in decreasing order of Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) score. To maximize lifetime gained through liver transplantation, posttransplant survival should be considered in prioritizing liver waiting list candidates. We evaluate a survival benefit based system for allocating deceased-donor livers to chronic liver failure patients. Under the proposed system, at the time of offer, the transplant survival benefit score would be computed for each patient active on the waiting list. The proposed score is based on the difference in 5-year mean lifetime (with vs. without a liver transplant) and accounts for patient and donor characteristics. The rank correlation between benefit score and MELD score is 0.67. There is great overlap in the distribution of benefit scores across MELD categories, since waiting list mortality is significantly affected by several factors. Simulation results indicate that over 2000 life-years would be saved per year if benefit-based allocation was implemented. The shortage of donor livers increases the need to maximize the life-saving capacity of procured livers. Allocation of deceased-donor livers to chronic liver failure patients would be improved by prioritizing patients by transplant survival benefit. [source] The Influence of Operational Protocol on the Fluid Dynamics in the 12 cc Penn State Pulsatile Pediatric Ventricular Assist Device: The Effect of End-Diastolic DelayARTIFICIAL ORGANS, Issue 4 2010Benjamin T. Cooper Abstract The success of adult ventricular assist devices (VADs), coupled with the high transplant waiting list mortality of infants (40%) has prompted Penn State to develop a pediatric version of the clinically successful adult device. Although the primary use of this device will be bridge-to-transplant, there has been sufficient clinical data to demonstrate the efficacy of VADs in a bridge-to-recovery setting. However, removing the patient from the device, a process known as weaning, demands operation of the device at a lower beat rate and concomitant increased risk for thromboembolism. Previous studies have shown that the interrelated flow characteristics necessary for the prevention of thrombosis in a pulsatile VAD are a strong inlet jet, a late diastolic recirculating flow, and a wall shear rate greater than 500/s. In an effort to develop a strong inlet jet and rotational flow pattern at a lower beat and flow rate, we have compressed diastole by altering the end-diastolic delay time (EDD). Particle image velocimetry was used to compare the flow fields and wall shear rates in the chamber of the 12 cc Penn State pulsatile pediatric VAD operated at 50 beats per minute using EDDs of 10, 50, and 100 ms. Although we expected the 100 ms EDD to have the best wall shear profiles, we found that the 50 ms EDD condition was superior to both the 10 and 100 EDD conditions, due to a longer sustained inlet jet. [source] | ||||||||||