• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

种族、性别和保险状况对肝移植等待名单决策时间的影响。

The Effect of Race, Sex, and Insurance Status on Time-to-Listing Decisions for Liver Transplantation.

作者信息

Bryce Cindy L, Chang Chung-Chou Ho, Angus Derek C, Arnold Robert M, Farrell Maxwell, Roberts Mark S

机构信息

Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA 15213, USA.

出版信息

J Transplant. 2010;2010:467976. doi: 10.1155/2010/467976. Epub 2010 Dec 23.

DOI:10.1155/2010/467976
PMID:21234099
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3014672/
Abstract

Fair allocation of organs to candidates listed for transplantation is fundamental to organ-donation policies. Processes leading to listing decisions are neither regulated nor understood. We explored whether patient characteristics affected timeliness of listing using population-based data on 144,507 adults hospitalized with liver-related disease in Pennsylvania. We linked hospitalizations to other secondary data and found 3,071 listed for transplants, 1,537 received transplants, and 57,020 died. Among candidates, 61% (n = 1,879) and 85.5% (n = 2,626) were listed within 1 and 3 years of diagnosis; 26.7% (n = 1,130) and 95% (n = 1,468) of recipients were transplanted within 1 and 3 years of listing. Using competing-risks models, we found few overall differences by sex, but both black patients and those insured by Medicare and Medicaid (combined) waited longer before being listed. Patients with combined Medicare and Medicaid insurance, as well as those with Medicaid alone, were also more likely to die without ever being listed. Once listed, the time to transplant was slightly longer for women, but it did not differ by race/ethnicity or insurance. The early time period from diagnosis to listing for liver transplantation reveals unwanted variation related to demographics that jeopardizes overall fairness of organ allocation and needs to be further explored.

摘要

向列入移植名单的候选人公平分配器官是器官捐赠政策的根本。导致列入名单决定的过程既未得到规范,也未被充分理解。我们利用宾夕法尼亚州144,507名因肝病住院的成年人的基于人群的数据,探讨了患者特征是否会影响列入名单的及时性。我们将住院数据与其他二级数据相链接,发现有3,071人被列入移植名单,1,537人接受了移植,57,020人死亡。在候选人中,61%(n = 1,879)和85.5%(n = 2,626)在诊断后的1年和3年内被列入名单;26.7%(n = 1,130)和95%(n = 1,468)的受者在列入名单后的1年和3年内接受了移植。使用竞争风险模型,我们发现总体上性别差异不大,但黑人患者以及那些由医疗保险和医疗补助(合并)承保的患者在列入名单前等待的时间更长。同时拥有医疗保险和医疗补助的患者,以及仅拥有医疗补助的患者,也更有可能在从未被列入名单的情况下死亡。一旦被列入名单,女性接受移植的时间略长,但在种族/族裔或保险方面没有差异。从诊断到列入肝移植名单的早期阶段显示出与人口统计学相关的不良差异,这危及器官分配的总体公平性,需要进一步探讨。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0c28/3014672/c8e5cccc22c9/JTRAN2010-467976.004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0c28/3014672/a46ae58dc2ce/JTRAN2010-467976.001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0c28/3014672/238690f75e31/JTRAN2010-467976.002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0c28/3014672/f6bdefcb1b57/JTRAN2010-467976.003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0c28/3014672/c8e5cccc22c9/JTRAN2010-467976.004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0c28/3014672/a46ae58dc2ce/JTRAN2010-467976.001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0c28/3014672/238690f75e31/JTRAN2010-467976.002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0c28/3014672/f6bdefcb1b57/JTRAN2010-467976.003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0c28/3014672/c8e5cccc22c9/JTRAN2010-467976.004.jpg

相似文献

1
The Effect of Race, Sex, and Insurance Status on Time-to-Listing Decisions for Liver Transplantation.种族、性别和保险状况对肝移植等待名单决策时间的影响。
J Transplant. 2010;2010:467976. doi: 10.1155/2010/467976. Epub 2010 Dec 23.
2
Insurance Type and Solid Organ Transplantation Outcomes: A Historical Perspective on How Medicaid Expansion Might Impact Transplantation Outcomes.保险类型与实体器官移植结果:关于医疗补助扩大可能如何影响移植结果的历史视角
J Am Coll Surg. 2016 Oct;223(4):611-620.e4. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2016.07.004. Epub 2016 Jul 25.
3
Outcomes of liver transplantation by insurance types in the United States.美国不同保险类型的肝移植结果。
Am J Manag Care. 2020 Apr 1;26(4):e121-e126. doi: 10.37765/ajmc.2020.42839.
4
Patient selection criteria for liver transplantation.肝移植的患者选择标准。
Minerva Chir. 2003 Oct;58(5):635-48.
5
Migration of Patients for Liver Transplantation and Waitlist Outcomes.患者转移对肝移植和候补名单结果的影响。
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2019 Oct;17(11):2347-2355.e5. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2019.04.060. Epub 2019 May 8.
6
Sociodemographic differences in early access to liver transplantation services.早期获得肝移植服务方面的社会人口统计学差异。
Am J Transplant. 2009 Sep;9(9):2092-101. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2009.02737.x. Epub 2009 Jul 23.
7
Rates of solid-organ wait-listing, transplantation, and survival among residents of rural and urban areas.农村和城市地区居民的实体器官等待名单登记率、移植率和生存率。
JAMA. 2008 Jan 9;299(2):202-7. doi: 10.1001/jama.2007.50.
8
Multicenter evaluation of a national organ sharing policy for highly sensitized patients listed for heart transplantation in Canada.多中心评估加拿大高致敏患者心脏移植名单上的国家器官共享政策。
J Heart Lung Transplant. 2017 May;36(5):491-498. doi: 10.1016/j.healun.2017.01.003. Epub 2017 Jan 6.
9
Projected survival benefit as criterion for listing and organ allocation in heart transplantation.预期生存获益作为心脏移植列入名单及器官分配的标准
J Heart Lung Transplant. 2005 Jun;24(6):680-9. doi: 10.1016/j.healun.2004.04.015.
10
Liver transplantation for status 1: the consequences of good intentions.1级状态下的肝移植:善意的后果
Liver Transpl. 2007 May;13(5):699-707. doi: 10.1002/lt.21125.

引用本文的文献

1
Patient sex and use of tranexamic acid in liver transplantation.肝移植中患者性别与氨甲环酸的使用
Front Med (Lausanne). 2024 Sep 23;11:1452733. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2024.1452733. eCollection 2024.
2
Influence of sex on outcomes of liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma: a multicenter cohort study in China.性别对肝细胞癌肝移植结局的影响:中国一项多中心队列研究
Cancer Biol Med. 2024 Feb 28;21(4):347-62. doi: 10.20892/j.issn.2095-3941.2023.0453.
3
Delayed referral for liver transplant evaluation worsens outcomes in chronic liver disease patients requiring inpatient transplant evaluation.

本文引用的文献

1
Sociodemographic differences in early access to liver transplantation services.早期获得肝移植服务方面的社会人口统计学差异。
Am J Transplant. 2009 Sep;9(9):2092-101. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2009.02737.x. Epub 2009 Jul 23.
2
A systematic review of barriers in access to renal transplantation among African Americans in the United States.对美国非裔美国人肾移植获取障碍的系统评价。
Clin Transplant. 2006 Nov-Dec;20(6):769-75. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-0012.2006.00568.x.
3
Live and deceased donor kidney transplantation in patients aged 75 years and older in the United States.
对于需要住院进行肝移植评估的慢性肝病患者,延迟进行肝移植评估会使结局恶化。
World J Transplant. 2023 Jun 18;13(4):169-182. doi: 10.5500/wjt.v13.i4.169.
4
Regional transplant rates depend more on physician-dependent variables than on proximity to transplant center.区域移植率更多地取决于依赖医生的变量,而不是与移植中心的距离。
Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2023 May 12;408(1):191. doi: 10.1007/s00423-023-02874-9.
5
Impact of waiting time on post-transplant survival for recipients with hepatocellular carcinoma: A natural experiment randomized by blood group.等待时间对肝细胞癌受体移植后生存率的影响:一项按血型随机分组的自然实验。
JHEP Rep. 2022 Nov 22;5(2):100629. doi: 10.1016/j.jhepr.2022.100629. eCollection 2023 Feb.
6
Disparities in Social Determinants of Health Among Patients Receiving Liver Transplant: Analysis of the National Inpatient Sample From 2016 to 2019.接受肝移植患者健康的社会决定因素差异:对2016年至2019年全国住院患者样本的分析
Cureus. 2022 Jul 5;14(7):e26567. doi: 10.7759/cureus.26567. eCollection 2022 Jul.
7
Decreased access to pediatric liver transplantation during the COVID-19 pandemic.COVID-19 大流行期间儿科肝移植机会减少。
Pediatr Transplant. 2022 Mar;26(2):e14162. doi: 10.1111/petr.14162. Epub 2021 Oct 11.
8
Impact of Payer Status on Delisting Among Liver Transplant Candidates in the United States.美国肝移植候选人除名中付款人状态的影响。
Liver Transpl. 2021 Feb;27(2):200-208. doi: 10.1002/lt.25936. Epub 2020 Dec 31.
9
Change in Health Insurance Coverage After Liver Transplantation Can Be Associated with Worse Outcomes.肝移植后医疗保险覆盖范围的变化可能与更差的结果相关。
Dig Dis Sci. 2018 Jun;63(6):1463-1472. doi: 10.1007/s10620-018-5031-6. Epub 2018 Mar 24.
10
Disentangling the effects of race and socioeconomic factors on liver transplantation rates for hepatocellular carcinoma.解析种族和社会经济因素对肝细胞癌肝移植率的影响。
Clin Transplant. 2016 Jun;30(6):714-21. doi: 10.1111/ctr.12739. Epub 2016 Apr 30.
Int Urol Nephrol. 2005;37(3):641-8. doi: 10.1007/s11255-004-0010-6.
4
A clinically based discrete-event simulation of end-stage liver disease and the organ allocation process.基于临床的终末期肝病及器官分配过程的离散事件模拟。
Med Decis Making. 2005 Mar-Apr;25(2):199-209. doi: 10.1177/0272989X04268956.
5
Model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) and allocation of donor livers.终末期肝病模型(MELD)与供肝分配
Gastroenterology. 2003 Jan;124(1):91-6. doi: 10.1053/gast.2003.50016.
6
Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network. Health Resources and Services Administration, HHS. Final rule.器官获取与移植网络。卫生与公众服务部卫生资源与服务管理局。最终规则。
Fed Regist. 1999 Oct 20;64(202):56650-61.
7
Impact of gender on access to the renal transplant waiting list for pediatric and adult patients.性别对儿科和成年患者进入肾移植等候名单的影响。
J Am Soc Nephrol. 2000 May;11(5):958-964. doi: 10.1681/ASN.V115958.
8
A model to predict poor survival in patients undergoing transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts.预测经颈静脉肝内门体分流术患者生存预后不良的模型。
Hepatology. 2000 Apr;31(4):864-71. doi: 10.1053/he.2000.5852.
9
Geographic favoritism in liver transplantation--unfortunate or unfair?肝移植中的地域偏袒——是不幸还是不公?
N Engl J Med. 1998 Oct 29;339(18):1322-5. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199810293391811.
10
Organ transplantation--barriers, outcomes, and evolving policies.器官移植——障碍、结果及不断演变的政策。
JAMA. 1998 Oct 7;280(13):1184-5. doi: 10.1001/jama.280.13.1184.