INFORMING ORGAN ALLOCATION POLICY: DEFINING EQUITABLE AND UTILITY-BASED AGE CUT-OFFS FOR DONOR AND RECIPIENT AGE MATCHING

2008 ◽  
Vol 86 (Supplement) ◽  
pp. 115
Author(s):  
J S. Gill ◽  
P W. Nickerson ◽  
G A. Knoll ◽  
E H. Cole
2020 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
pp. 687-696
Author(s):  
Jimena Cabrera ◽  
Mario Fernández-Ruiz ◽  
Hernando Trujillo ◽  
Esther González ◽  
María Molina ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Advances in life expectancy have led to an increase in the number of elderly people with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). Scarce information is available on the outcomes of kidney transplantation (KT) in extremely elderly patients based on an allocation policy prioritizing donor–recipient age matching. Methods We included recipients ≥75 years that underwent KT from similarly aged deceased donors at our institution between 2002 and 2015. Determinants of death-censored graft and patient survival were assessed by Cox regression. Results We included 138 recipients with a median follow-up of 38.8 months. Median (interquartile range) age of recipients and donors was 77.5 (76.3–79.7) and 77.0 years (74.7–79.0), with 22.5% of donors ≥80 years. Primary graft non-function occurred in 8.0% (11/138) of patients. Cumulative incidence rates for post-transplant infection and biopsy-proven acute rejection (BPAR) were 70.3% (97/138) and 15.2% (21/138), respectively. One- and 5-year patient survival were 82.1 and 60.1%, respectively, whereas the corresponding rates for death-censored graft survival were 95.6 and 93.1%. Infection was the leading cause of death (46.0% of fatal cases). The occurrence of BPAR was associated with lower 1-year patient survival [hazard ratio (HR) = 4.21, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.64–10.82; P = 0.003]. Diabetic nephropathy was the only factor predicting 5-year death-censored graft survival (HR = 4.82, 95% CI 1.08–21.56; P = 0.040). Conclusions ESRD patients ≥75 years can access KT and remain dialysis free for their remaining lifespan by using grafts from extremely aged deceased donors, yielding encouraging results in terms of recipient and graft survival.


Circulation ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 142 (Suppl_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Wagih m Zayed ◽  
Neha Bansal ◽  
Snehal R Patel ◽  
Jacqueline M Lamour ◽  
Daniel J GOLDSTEIN ◽  
...  

Introduction: Heart failure (HF) is the leading cause of death in adults with congenital heart disease (ACHD). Heart transplant (HT) is one of the few options for the treatment of advanced HF in this growing population. In October 2018, the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) implemented a change in organ allocation criteria. The effect of this change on outcomes in ACHD patients (pts) after listing and transplant has not been evaluated. Hypothesis: Change in organ allocation criteria negatively impacts outcomes in ACHD patients. Methods: Data from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients in pts age > 18 years old listed for HT between Oct. 2016 and 0ct. 2019 and followed through March 2020 were analyzed. Pts were grouped by diagnosis (ACHD and non-ACHD) and by the time of listing (pre- and post-change in allocation criteria). Differences in comorbidities, outcomes while listed, and 1-year Kaplan Meier survival post-HT were compared among groups. For comparison, post-change criteria (status 1-6) were equated to pre-change criteria (status 1A, 1B, 2). Results: Over 3 years, 11,931 patients were listed for HT; 459 had a primary diagnosis of ACHD. ACHD was present in 279/7942 pts listed in the 2 years pre-change and 180/3989 pts in the year post-change. ACHD pts listed post-change were less likely to have a history of cardiac surgery (88% vs. 79%, p=0.01) and more likely to have an abnormal BMI (p=0.015) than ACHD pts pre-change. Post-change, ACHD pts were listed at a higher priority status compared to pre-change ACHD. (Figure). The proportion of pts transplanted with ACHD increased slightly pre- and post-change (3.7% vs. 4.1%). There was no difference in 1-year survival in ACHD pts transplanted pre- and post-change (Figure). Conclusions: Recent changes to the UNOS organ allocation policy increased the proportion of ACHD patients transplanted with no change in early post-HT survival.


2001 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 365-376 ◽  
Author(s):  
JAMES F. CHILDRESS

Organ allocation policy involves a mixture of ethical, scientific, medical, legal, and political factors, among others. It is thus hard, and perhaps even impossible, to identify and fully separate ethical considerations from all these other factors. Yet I will focus primarily on the ethical considerations embedded in the current debate in the United States about organ allocation policy. I will argue that it is important to put patients first—in the language of the title of one of the major public hearings—but even then significant ethical questions will remain about exactly how to put patients first.


2010 ◽  
pp. 24-24
Author(s):  
Dilip K ◽  
WC Lee ◽  
YY Jan ◽  
Po-Huang Lee

2013 ◽  
Vol 19 (12) ◽  
pp. 1343-1353 ◽  
Author(s):  
Neil Mehta ◽  
Jennifer L. Dodge ◽  
Aparna Goel ◽  
John Paul Roberts ◽  
Ryutaro Hirose ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document