Models for Kidney Allocation

  • Stefanos A. Zenios
Part of the International Series in Operations Research & Management Science book series (ISOR, volume 70)


The continued shortage of organs implies that the organ allocation policy determines who lives and who dies. This creates one of medicine’s most vexing dilemmas, and the crux of this dilemma is the tradeoff between clinical efficiency and equity. This chapter describes OR models that have been used to study the problem and the related tradeoffs. A taxonomy of the literature is developed, and a description of the key analytical and computational models is provided. Directions for future research are also presented.

Key words

Kidney allocation Equity Efficiency Queueing models Fluid models Simulation Evidence-based medicine 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    United Network for Organ Sharing (2002). UNOS Statistical Reports.
  2. [2]
    Allen, R.D.M. and J.R. Chapman (1994). A Manual of Renal Transplantation. Edward Arnold, London.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    Ghjertson, D.W., P.I. Terasaki, B.S. Takemoto, and M.R. Mickey (1991). National allocation of cadaveric kidneys by HLA matching. New England Journal of Medicine, 324, 1032–1036.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    Chertow, G., S.L. Milford, H.S. MacKenzie, and B.M. Brenner (1996). Antigen-independent determinants of cadaveric kidney transplant failure. Journal of the American Medical Association, 276, 1732–1736.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    Eggers, P.W. (1995). Racial differences in access to kidney transplantation. Health Care Financing Review, 17, 89–103.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    David, I. and U. Yechiali (1985). A time-dependent stopping problem with application to live organ transplant. Operations Research, 33, 491–504.PubMedMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    Ahn, J.H. and J.C. Hornberger (1996). Involving patients in the cadaveric kidney transplant allocation process: A decision-theoretic perspective. Management Science, 42, 629–641.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    Gold, M.R., J.E. Siegel, L.B. Russell, and M.C. Weinstein, Eds. (1996). Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. Oxford University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    Derman, C., G.J. Lieberman, and S.M. Ross (1972). A sequential stochastic assignment problem. Management Science, 18, 349–355.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    Albright, S.C. and C. Derman (1972). Asymptotic optimal policies for the stochastic sequential assignment problem. Management Science, 19, 46–51.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    Righter, R.L. (1988). A resource allocation problem in a random environment. Operations Research, 37, 329–338.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    David, I. and U. Yechiali (1995). One-attribute sequential assignment match processes in discrete time. Operations Research, 43, 879–884.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  13. [13]
    Zenios, S.A., G.M. Chertow, and L.M. Wein (2000). Dynamic allocation of kidneys to candidates on the transplant waiting list. Operations Research, 48, 549–569.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. [14]
    Zenios, S.A., L.M. Wein, and G.M. Chertow (1999). Evidence-based organ allocation. American Journal of Medicine, 107, 52–61.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. [15]
    Votruba, M. (2002). Efficiency-Equity Tradeoffs in the Allocation of Cadaveric Kidneys. Working Paper, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    Pritsker, A.B. (1998). Life and death decisions: Organ transplantation allocation policy analysis. OR/MS Today, 25, 22–28.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    Opelz, G. and T. Wujciak (1995). Cadaveric kidneys should be allocated according to the HLA match. Transplantation Proceedings, 27, 93–99.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. [18]
    Howard, D.H. (2001). Dynamic analysis of liver allocation policies. Medical Decision Making, 21, 257–266.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. [19]
    Zenios S.A. (1999). Modeling the transplant waiting list: A queueing model with reneging. Queueing Systems: Theory and Applications, 31, 239–251.zbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  20. [20]
    U.S. Renal Data System (2002). Annual Data Report: Atlas of End-Stage Renal Disease in the United States. National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, Bethesda, MD.Google Scholar
  21. [21]
    Su, X. and S.A. Zenios (2002). Patient Choice in Kidney Transplantation: A Sequential Stochastic Assignment Model. Working Paper, Graduate School of Business, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.Google Scholar
  22. [22]
    Su, X. and S.A. Zenios (2002). Optimal Control of a Medical Waiting System with Autonomous Patients. Working Paper, Graduate School of Business, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.Google Scholar
  23. [23]
    Howard, D.H. (2000). Endogenous Determinants of Organ Supply. Unpublished Manuscript.Google Scholar
  24. [24]
    Kaserman, D.L. and A.H. Barnett (2002). The U.S. Organ Procurement System: A Prescription for Reform. The AEI Press, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  25. [25]
    Kristof, N.D. (2002). Psst! Sell your kidney? New York Times, November 12, A27.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, Inc. 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stefanos A. Zenios
    • 1
  1. 1.Graduate School of BusinessStanford UniversityStanford

Personalised recommendations