Home About us Contact | |||
Primary Transplantation (primary + transplantation)
Selected AbstractsHarm and Benefits of Primary Liver Resection and Salvage Transplantation for Hepatocellular CarcinomaAMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 3 2010A. Cucchetti Primary transplantation offers longer life-expectancy in comparison to hepatic resection (HR) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) followed by salvage transplantation; however, livers not used for primary transplantation can be reallocated to the remaining waiting-list patients, thus, the harm caused to resected patients could be balanced, or outweighed, by the benefit obtained from reallocation of livers originating from HCC patients first being resected. A Markov model was developed to investigate this issue based on literature data or estimated from the United Network for Organ Sharing database. Markov model shows that primary transplantation offers longer life-expectancy in comparison to HR and salvage transplantation if 5-year posttransplant survival remains higher than 60%. The balance between the harm for resected patients and the benefit for the remaining waiting list depends on (a) the proportion of HCC candidates, (b) the percentage shifted to HR and (c) the median expected time-to-transplant. Faced with a low proportion of HCC candidates, the harm caused to resected patients was higher than the benefit that could be obtained for the waiting-list population from re-allocation of extra livers. An increased proportion of HCC candidates and/or an increased median time-to-transplant could lead to a benefit for waiting-list patients that outweighs this harm. [source] Retransplantation for hepatic allograft failure: Prognostic modeling and ethical considerationsLIVER TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 4 2002Scott W. Biggins Retransplantation already accounts for 10% of all liver transplants performed, and this percentage is likely to increase as patients live long enough to develop graft failure from recurrent disease. Overall, retransplantation is associated with significantly diminished survival and increased costs. This review summarizes the current causes of graft failure after primary liver transplant, prognostic models that can identify the subset of patients for retransplantation with outcomes comparable to primary transplantation, and ethical considerations in this setting, i.e., outcomes-based versus urgency-based approaches. [source] Harm and Benefits of Primary Liver Resection and Salvage Transplantation for Hepatocellular CarcinomaAMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 3 2010A. Cucchetti Primary transplantation offers longer life-expectancy in comparison to hepatic resection (HR) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) followed by salvage transplantation; however, livers not used for primary transplantation can be reallocated to the remaining waiting-list patients, thus, the harm caused to resected patients could be balanced, or outweighed, by the benefit obtained from reallocation of livers originating from HCC patients first being resected. A Markov model was developed to investigate this issue based on literature data or estimated from the United Network for Organ Sharing database. Markov model shows that primary transplantation offers longer life-expectancy in comparison to HR and salvage transplantation if 5-year posttransplant survival remains higher than 60%. The balance between the harm for resected patients and the benefit for the remaining waiting list depends on (a) the proportion of HCC candidates, (b) the percentage shifted to HR and (c) the median expected time-to-transplant. Faced with a low proportion of HCC candidates, the harm caused to resected patients was higher than the benefit that could be obtained for the waiting-list population from re-allocation of extra livers. An increased proportion of HCC candidates and/or an increased median time-to-transplant could lead to a benefit for waiting-list patients that outweighs this harm. [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] |