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
Comparative Study
. 2012 Jun;18(6):630-40.
doi: 10.1002/lt.23418.

Comparative effectiveness of donation after cardiac death versus donation after brain death liver transplantation: Recognizing who can benefit

Colleen L Jay  1 , Anton I Skaro, Daniela P Ladner, Edward Wang, Vadim Lyuksemburg, Yaojen Chang, Hongmei Xu, Sandhya Talakokkla, Neehar Parikh, Jane L Holl, Gordon B Hazen, Michael M Abecassis
Affiliations
Comparative Study

Comparative effectiveness of donation after cardiac death versus donation after brain death liver transplantation: Recognizing who can benefit

Colleen L Jay et al. Liver Transpl. 2012 Jun.

Abstract

Due to organ scarcity and wait-list mortality, transplantation of donation after cardiac death (DCD) livers has increased. However, the group of patients benefiting from DCD liver transplantation is unknown. We studied the comparative effectiveness of DCD versus donation after brain death (DBD) liver transplantation. A Markov model was constructed to compare undergoing DCD transplantation with remaining on the wait-list until death or DBD liver transplantation. Differences in life years, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and costs according to candidate Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score were considered. A separate model for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients with and without MELD exception points was constructed. For patients with a MELD score <15, DCD transplantation resulted in greater costs and reduced effectiveness. Patients with a MELD score of 15 to 20 experienced an improvement in effectiveness (0.07 QALYs) with DCD liver transplantation, but the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was >$2,000,000/QALY. Patients with MELD scores of 21 to 30 (0.25 QALYs) and >30 (0.83 QALYs) also benefited from DCD transplantation with ICERs of $478,222/QALY and $120,144/QALY, respectively. Sensitivity analyses demonstrated stable results for MELD scores <15 and >20, but the preferred strategy for the MELD 15 to 20 category was uncertain. DCD transplantation was associated with increased costs and reduced survival for HCC patients with exception points but led to improved survival (0.26 QALYs) at a cost of $392,067/QALY for patients without exception points. In conclusion, DCD liver transplantation results in inferior survival for patients with a MELD score <15 and HCC patients receiving MELD exception points, but provides a survival benefit to patients with a MELD score >20 and to HCC patients without MELD exception points.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 3
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. 2007 Annual Report of the US Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network and the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients: Transplant Data 1997–2006. Rockville, MD: Health Resources and Services Administration, Healthcare Systems Bureau, Division of Transplantation; 2007.
    1. Heron MP, Hoyert DL, Murphy SL, et al. National Vital Statistics Report. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics; 2008.
    1. Tuttle-Newhall JE, Krishnan SM, Levy MF, et al. Organ donation and utilization in the United States: 1998–2007. American Journal of Transplantation. 2009;9:879–893. - PubMed
    1. Abt PL, Desai NM, Crawford MD, et al. Survival following liver transplantation from non-heart beating donors. Annals of Surgery. 2004;239:87–92. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Federal Register. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services; 2006. Medicare and Medicaid programs; conditions for coverage for organ procurement organizations (OPOs). Final rule; pp. 30981–31054. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms