Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Recipient and Donor Selection and Transplant Logistics: The US Perspective

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Liver Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine

  • 1272 Accesses

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Based on OPTN data as of April 8, 2017. 2004 Annual Report of the U.S. Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network and the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients: Transplant Data 1994–2003. Rockville, MD: Department of Health and Human Services, Health Resources and Services Administration, Healthcare Systems Bureau, Division of Transplantation; Richmond, VA: United Network for Organ Sharing; Ann Arbor, MI: University Renal Research and Education Association.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Busuttil RW, Tanaka K. The utility of marginal donors in liver transplantation. Liver Transpl. 2003;9(7):651–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Alonso O, et al. Advanced donor age increases the risk of severe recurrent hepatitis C after liver transplantation. Transpl Int. 2005;18(8):902–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Freeman RB Jr, Edwards EB. Liver transplant waiting time does not correlate with waiting list mortality: implications for liver allocation policy. Liver Transpl. 2000;6(5):543–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Kamath PS, et al. A model to predict survival in patients with end-stage liver disease. Hepatology. 2001;33(2):464–70.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Wiesner RH, et al. MELD and PELD: application of survival models to liver allocation. Liver Transpl. 2001;7(7):567–80.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Network-HRSA, O.P.a.T. Final rule with comment period. Federal Register. 1989;63:16296–338.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Transplantation., C. o.O.P.a. Assessing current policies and the potential impact of the DHHS final rule. Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  9. McDiarmid SV, Anand R, Lindblad AS. Development of a pediatric end-stage liver disease score to predict poor outcome in children awaiting liver transplantation. Transplantation. 2002;74(2):173–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Wiesner R, et al. Model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) and allocation of donor livers. Gastroenterology. 2003;124(1):91–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Sharma P, et al. Liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma: the MELD impact. Liver Transpl. 2004;10(1):36–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Biggins SW, Kim WR, Terrault NA, Saab S, Balan V, Schiano T, et al. Evidence-based incorporation of serum sodium concentration into MELD. Gastroenterology 2006;130:1652–60

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Nekrasov V, Matsuoka L, Rauf M, Kaur N, Cao S, Groshen S, Alexopoulos SP. National Outcomes of Liver Transplantation for Model for End-Stage Liver Disease Score ≥40: The Impact of Share 35. Am J Transplant. 2016 Oct;16(10):2912–24. doi: 10.1111/ajt.13823. Epub 2016 May 13.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Gentry SE, Chow EK, Massie A, Luo X, Shteyn E, Pyke J, Zaun D, Snyder JJ, Israni AK, Kasiske B, Segev DL. Liver sharing and organ procurement organization performance under redistricted allocation. Liver Transpl. 2015;21(8):1031–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Schaubel DE, et al. Survival benefit-based deceased-donor liver allocation. Am J Transplant. 2009;9(4 Pt 2):970–81.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Wiesner RH. Patient selection in an era of donor liver shortage: current US policy. Nat Clin Pract Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2005;2(1):24–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Lopez-Navidad A, et al. Successful transplantation of organs retrieved from donors with bacterial meningitis. Transplantation. 1997;64(2):365–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Fischer SA. Emerging viruses in transplantation: there is more to infection after transplant than CMV and EBV. Transplantation. 2008;86(10):1327–39.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Kauffman HM, McBride MA, Delmonico FL. First report of the united network for organ sharing transplant tumor registry: donors with a history of cancer. Transplantation. 2000;70(12):1747–51.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Feng S, et al. Characteristics associated with liver graft failure: the concept of a donor risk index. Am J Transplant. 2006;6(4):783–90.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Berenguer M, et al. Contribution of donor age to the recent decrease in patient survival among HCV-infected liver transplant recipients. Hepatology. 2002;36(1):202–10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Burdelski MM, Rogiers X. What lessons have we learned in pediatric liver transplantation? J Hepatol. 2005;42(1):28–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Tuttle-Newhall JE, et al. Organ donation and utilization in the United States: 1998–2007. Am J Transplant. 2009;9(4 Pt 2):879–93.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Chan EY, et al. Ischemic cholangiopathy following liver transplantation from donation after cardiac death donors. Liver Transpl. 2008;14(5):604–10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Abt PL, et al. Survival following liver transplantation from non-heart-beating donors. Ann Surg. 2004;239(1):87–92.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. McCormack L, Dutkowski P, El-Badry AM, Clavien PA. Liver transplantation using fatty livers: always feasible? J Hepatol. 2011;54(5):1055–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jehp.2010.11.004.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Novitzky D, et al. Change from aerobic to anaerobic metabolism after brain death, and reversal following triiodothyronine therapy. Transplantation. 1988;45(1):32–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Cooper DK, Novitzky D, Wicomb WN. The pathophysiological effects of brain death on potential donor organs, with particular reference to the heart. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 1989;71(4):261–6.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. DuBose J, Salim A. Aggressive organ donor management protocol. J Intensive Care Med. 2008;23(6):367–75.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Roth BJ, et al. Cadaveric organ donor recruitment at Los Angeles County Hospital: improvement after formation of a structured clinical, educational and administrative service. Clin Transpl. 2003;17(Suppl 9):52–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Franklin GA, et al. Optimization of donor management goals yields increased organ use. Am Surg. 2010;76(6):587–94.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Niemann CU, Feiner J, Swain S, et al. Therapeutic hypothermia in deceased organ donors and kidneygraft function. N Engl J Med 2015;373:405-414.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Ghobrial RM, et al. Donor morbidity after living donation for liver transplantation. Gastroenterology. 2008;135(2):468–76.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Roberts JP, et al. Influence of graft type on outcomes after pediatric liver transplantation. Am J Transplant. 2004;4(3):373–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of General- and Visceral-, Vascular and Pediatric Surgery, University of Wuerzburg, Medical Center, Wuerzburg, Germany

    Ingo Klein & Johanna Wagner

  2. Anesthesia and Perioperative Care, Department of Surgery, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA

    Claus U. Niemann MD

Authors
  1. Ingo Klein
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Johanna Wagner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Claus U. Niemann MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Claus U. Niemann MD .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Anesthesiology, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, New York, USA

    Gebhard Wagener

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Klein, I., Wagner, J., Niemann, C.U. (2018). Recipient and Donor Selection and Transplant Logistics: The US Perspective. In: Wagener, G. (eds) Liver Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-64298-7_9

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-64298-7_9

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-64297-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-64298-7

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation