Article

Should a lower quality organ go to the least sick patient? Model for end-stage liver disease score and donor risk index as predictors of early allograft dysfunction.

Multi-Organ Transplant Program, London Health Sciences Centre, The University of Western Ontario, London, Canada.
Transplantation Proceedings (Impact Factor: 0.95). 06/2012; 44(5):1303-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2012.01.115
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT There is a global tendency to justify transplanting extended criteria organs (ECD; Donor Risk Index [DRI] ≥ 1.7) into recipients with a lower Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score and to transplant standard criteria organs (DRI < 1.7) into recipients with a higher MELD scores. There is a lack of evidence in the current literature to justify this assumption.
A review of our prospectively entered database for donation after brain death (DBD) liver transplantation (n = 310) between January 1, 2006, and September 30, 2010, was performed. DRI was dichotomized as <1.7 and ≥ 1.7. Recipients were divided into 3 strata, those with high (≥ 27), moderate (15-26), and low MELD (<15) scores. The recently validated definition of early allograft dysfunction (EAD) was used. We analyzed EAD and its relation with donor DRI and recipient MELD scores.
The overall incidence of EAD was 24.5%. Mortality in the first 6 months in recipients with EAD was 20% compared with 3.4% for those without EAD (relative risk [RR], 5.56, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.96-15.73; P < .001). Graft failure rate in the first 6 months in those with EAD was 27% compared with 5.8% for those without EAD (RR, 4.63; 95% CI, 2.02-10.6; P < .001). In patients with low MELD scores, a significantly increased rate of EAD (25%) was seen in patients transplanted with a high DRI liver compared with those transplanted with a low DRI liver (6.25%; P = .012). In moderate and high MELD recipients, there was no significant difference in the rate of EAD in patients transplanted with a high DRI liver (62%) compared with those transplanted with a low DRI liver (59%).
These results suggest that contrary to common belief it is not justified to preferentially allocate organs with higher DRI to recipients with lower MELD scores.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
67 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background: Liver organ donor characteristics have a significant impact on graft quality and in turn recipient outcome. In this study, we examined deceased liver donor characteristics and Donor Risk Index (DRI) trends in Canada over the past decade. Methods: Data were extracted from the Canadian Organ Replacement Register (CORR) and Quebec Transplant for the decade (2000-2010). Trends in the DRI and donor characteristics were examined including: age, race, height, cause of death (COD), location, cold ischemia time (CIT), and type of donation. Results: 3745 transplants using deceased liver donors were analyzed. Donor age, proportion of black donors, proportion of cerebrovascular accident as a COD, and proportion of donation after cardiac death (DCD) donors all increased over the aforementioned time period. The proportion of transplants classified geographically as local increased and the CIT for donor livers decreased. Although many of the parameters that adversely affect DRI increased over the study period, the DRI only showed a small significant trend in increasing value. The increase in these parameters has been counteracted by a decrease in modifiable risk factors such as CIT and distance traveled. Recipient 5-year survival rates increased from 71.43% (1999-2001) to 75.5% (2005-2007), however this trend was not significant. Although there was an increase in the utilization of older and DCD donor organs, recipient survival was not compromised. Conclusions: Liver donor demographic trends in Canada suggest an increase in utilization of higher risk donors. However, overall graft quality is not compromised due to a decreasing trend in CIT and increase in local transplants. Better coordination and allocation practices in liver transplantation across Canada minimize the risk for graft failure and results in good recipient outcomes. Liver Transpl , 2013. © 2013 AASLD.
    Liver Transplantation 08/2013; 19(11). · 3.79 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Liver transplantation (OLT) involves a 5% to 10% 30-day mortality rate. Multiple scores have been used as predictors of early postoperative mortality, such as the original Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) and MELD sodium. Investigations have been conducted over the last 5 years to find new predictors of early post-OLT mortality.
    Transplantation Proceedings 06/2014; 46(5):1407-12. · 0.95 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background. The D-MELD score was designed to prevent donor-recipient matches with a high risk of unfa-vorable outcome. The main objective of the present study was to assess the predictive value of the D-MELD score for 1-month and 3-month post-transplant mortality in a cohort of patients who underwent deceased-donor liver transplantation in Southern Brazil. Material and methods. A cohort study was con-ducted. Receiver operating characteristic c-statistics were used to determine the ability of the D-MELD score to predict mortality. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to analyze survival as a function of time re-garding D-MELD scores, and the Cox model was employed to assess the association between D-MELD and mortality. Results. Most recipients were male, with a mean age of 54.3 ± 9.6 years (n = 233 transplants). Mean donor age was 44.9 ± 16.8 years (19.3% of donors were aged ≥ 60 years). Mean MELD and D-MELD sco-res were 16.3 ± 7.1 and 733.1 ± 437.8 respectively. Overall survival at 1 and 3 months was 83.6%. The c-sta-tistic value for 1-and 3-month mortality was < 0.5 for the D-MELD. Analysis of Kaplan-Meier curves for groups with D-MELD scores < 1,600 and ≥ 1,600 did not show statistically significant differences in survival (p = 0.722). Conclusion. D-MELD scores were unable to predict survival in this cohort of Brazilian liver transplant recipients.
    11/2014; 13:781-787.