4.5 Article

Attitudes and Barriers to the Use of Donation After Cardiac Death Livers: Comparison of a United States Transplant Center Survey to the United Network for Organ Sharing Data

Journal

LIVER TRANSPLANTATION
Volume 23, Issue 11, Pages 1372-1383

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/lt.24855

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. American Society of Transplant Surgeons Scientific Studies Committee
  2. One Legacy Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Transplantation of liver grafts from donation after cardiac death (DCD) is limited. To identify barriers of DCD liver utilization, all active US liver transplant centers (n = 138) were surveyed, and the responses were compared with the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) data. In total, 74 (54%) centers responded, and diversity in attitudes was observed, with many not using organ and/or recipient prognostic variables defined in prior studies and UNOS data analysis. Most centers (74%) believed lack of a system allowing a timely retransplant is a barrier to utilization. UNOS data demonstrated worse 1-and 5-year patient survival (PS) and graft survival (GS) in DCD (PS, 86% and 64%; GS, 82% and 59%, respectively) versus donation after brain death (DBD) recipients (PS, 90% and 71%; GS, 88% and 69%, respectively). Donor alanine aminotransferase (ALT), recipientModel for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD), and cold ischemia time (CIT) significantly impacted DCD outcomes to a greater extent than DBD outcomes. At 3 years, relisting and retransplant rates were 7.9% and 4.6% higher in DCD recipients. To optimize outcome, our data support the use of DCD liver grafts with CIT < 6-8 hours in patients with MELD <= 20. In conclusion, standardization of donor and recipient criteria, defining the impact of ischemic cholangiopathy, addressing donor hospital policies, and developing a strategy for timely retransplant may help to expand the use of these organs.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available