Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2005 May;3(2):87-92.
doi: 10.3121/cmr.3.2.87.

Development of the allocation system for deceased donor liver transplantation

Affiliations
Review

Development of the allocation system for deceased donor liver transplantation

John M Coombes et al. Clin Med Res. 2005 May.

Abstract

As the number of pre- and post-transplant solid organ recipients continues to grow, it becomes important for all physicians to have an understanding of the process of organ procurement and allocation. In the United States, the current system for allocation and transplantation of human solid organs has been heavily influenced by the experience in deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT). This review highlights the significant changes that have occurred over the past 10 years in DDLT, with specific attention to the impact of the Model for Endstage Liver Disease (MELD) score on organ allocation and pre- and post-transplant survival. DDLT is managed by the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) which oversees organ procurement and allocation across geographically defined Organ Procurement Organizations (OPOs). For many years, deceased donor livers were allocated to waiting list patients based on subjective parameters of disease severity and accrued waiting time. In addition, organs have traditionally been retained within the OPO where they are procured contributing to geographic disparities in disease severity at the time of transplantation among deceased donor recipients. In response to a perceived unfairness in organ allocation, Congress issued its "Final Rule" in 1998. The Rule called for a more objective ranking of waiting list patients and more parity in disease severity among transplant recipients across OPOs. To date, little progress has been made in eliminating geographic inequities. Patients in the smallest OPOs continue to receive liver transplants at a lower level of disease severity. However, strides have been made to standardize assessments of disease severity and better prioritize waiting list patients. The MELD score has emerged as an excellent predictor of short-term mortality in patients with advanced liver disease, and patients listed for liver transplantation are now ranked based on their respective MELD scores. This has improved organ access to the most severely ill patients without compromising waiting list mortality or post-transplant survival. The current system for DDLT remains imperfect but has improved significantly in the past decade. As the number of patients in need of DDLT grows, the system will continue to evolve to meet this increasing demand.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Schematic of the prioritization of deceased donor livers in the pre- and post-MELD era.

References

    1. Starzl TE, Marchioro TL, VonKaulla KN, Hermann G, Brittain RS, Waddel WR. Homotransplantation of the liver in humans. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1963;117:659–676. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Institute of Medicine Committee on Organ Procurement and Transplantation Policy. Organ Procurement and Transplantation: Assessing Current Policies and the Potential Impact of the DHHS Final Rule. Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 1999. 1–38. - PubMed
    1. Everson GT. MELD: the answer or just more questions? Gastroenterology 2003;124:251–254. - PubMed
    1. Freeman RB, Harper AM, Edwards EB. Redrawing organ distribution boundaries: results of a computer-simulated analysis for liver transplantation. Liver Transpl 2002;8:659–666. - PubMed
    1. Trotter JF, Osgood MJ. MELD scores of liver transplant recipients according to size of waiting list: impact of organ allocation and patient outcomes. JAMA 2004;291:1871–1874. - PubMed

MeSH terms