Cargando…

Evolution of liver transplant organ allocation policy: Current limitations and future directions

Since the adoption of the model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score for organ allocation in 2002, numerous changes to the system of liver allocation and distribution have been made with the goal of decreasing waitlist mortality and minimizing geographic variability in median MELD score at time...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Polyak, Alexander, Kuo, Alexander, Sundaram, Vinay
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Baishideng Publishing Group Inc 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8422916/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34552690
http://dx.doi.org/10.4254/wjh.v13.i8.830
_version_ 1783749368379080704
author Polyak, Alexander
Kuo, Alexander
Sundaram, Vinay
author_facet Polyak, Alexander
Kuo, Alexander
Sundaram, Vinay
author_sort Polyak, Alexander
collection PubMed
description Since the adoption of the model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score for organ allocation in 2002, numerous changes to the system of liver allocation and distribution have been made with the goal of decreasing waitlist mortality and minimizing geographic variability in median MELD score at time of transplant without worsening post-transplant outcomes. These changes include the creation and adoption of the MELD-Na score for allocation, Regional Share 15, Regional Share for Status 1, Regional Share 35/National Share 15, and, most recently, the Acuity Circles Distribution Model. However, geographic differences in median MELD at time of transplant remain as well as limits to the MELD score for allocation, as etiology of liver disease and need for transplant changes. Acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) is a subset of liver failure where prevalence is rising and has been shown to have an increased mortality rate and need for transplantation that is under-demonstrated by the MELD score. This underscores the limitations of the MELD score and raises the question of whether MELD is the most accurate, objective allocation system. Alternatives to the MELD score have been proposed and studied, however MELD score remains as the current system used for allocation. This review highlights policy changes since the adoption of the MELD score, addresses limitations of the MELD score, reviews proposed alternatives to MELD, and examines the specific implications of these changes and alternatives for ACLF.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8422916
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Baishideng Publishing Group Inc
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-84229162021-09-21 Evolution of liver transplant organ allocation policy: Current limitations and future directions Polyak, Alexander Kuo, Alexander Sundaram, Vinay World J Hepatol Minireviews Since the adoption of the model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score for organ allocation in 2002, numerous changes to the system of liver allocation and distribution have been made with the goal of decreasing waitlist mortality and minimizing geographic variability in median MELD score at time of transplant without worsening post-transplant outcomes. These changes include the creation and adoption of the MELD-Na score for allocation, Regional Share 15, Regional Share for Status 1, Regional Share 35/National Share 15, and, most recently, the Acuity Circles Distribution Model. However, geographic differences in median MELD at time of transplant remain as well as limits to the MELD score for allocation, as etiology of liver disease and need for transplant changes. Acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) is a subset of liver failure where prevalence is rising and has been shown to have an increased mortality rate and need for transplantation that is under-demonstrated by the MELD score. This underscores the limitations of the MELD score and raises the question of whether MELD is the most accurate, objective allocation system. Alternatives to the MELD score have been proposed and studied, however MELD score remains as the current system used for allocation. This review highlights policy changes since the adoption of the MELD score, addresses limitations of the MELD score, reviews proposed alternatives to MELD, and examines the specific implications of these changes and alternatives for ACLF. Baishideng Publishing Group Inc 2021-08-27 2021-08-27 /pmc/articles/PMC8422916/ /pubmed/34552690 http://dx.doi.org/10.4254/wjh.v13.i8.830 Text en ©The Author(s) 2021. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This article is an open-access article which was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial.
spellingShingle Minireviews
Polyak, Alexander
Kuo, Alexander
Sundaram, Vinay
Evolution of liver transplant organ allocation policy: Current limitations and future directions
title Evolution of liver transplant organ allocation policy: Current limitations and future directions
title_full Evolution of liver transplant organ allocation policy: Current limitations and future directions
title_fullStr Evolution of liver transplant organ allocation policy: Current limitations and future directions
title_full_unstemmed Evolution of liver transplant organ allocation policy: Current limitations and future directions
title_short Evolution of liver transplant organ allocation policy: Current limitations and future directions
title_sort evolution of liver transplant organ allocation policy: current limitations and future directions
topic Minireviews
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8422916/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34552690
http://dx.doi.org/10.4254/wjh.v13.i8.830
work_keys_str_mv AT polyakalexander evolutionoflivertransplantorganallocationpolicycurrentlimitationsandfuturedirections
AT kuoalexander evolutionoflivertransplantorganallocationpolicycurrentlimitationsandfuturedirections
AT sundaramvinay evolutionoflivertransplantorganallocationpolicycurrentlimitationsandfuturedirections