• 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

相似文献

1
Offer patterns of nationally placed livers by donation service area.按捐赠服务区划分的全国性肝脏分配模式。
Liver Transpl. 2013 Apr;19(4):404-10. doi: 10.1002/lt.23604. Epub 2013 Mar 17.
2
Geographic inequity in access to livers for transplantation.器官移植中肝脏获取的地理不公平性。
Transplantation. 2011 Feb 27;91(4):479-86. doi: 10.1097/TP.0b013e3182066275.
3
Improvement in the Outcomes of MELD ≥ 40 Liver Transplantation: An Analysis of 207 Consecutive Transplants in a Highly Competitive DSA.终末期肝病模型(MELD)评分≥40分的肝移植患者预后改善:对高度竞争的供体特异性抗体(DSA)情况下207例连续肝移植的分析
Transplantation. 2017 Oct;101(10):2360-2367. doi: 10.1097/TP.0000000000001738.
4
The effect of the Statewide Sharing variance on geographic disparity in kidney transplantation in the United States.全州共享差异对美国肾脏移植地理差异的影响。
Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2014 Aug 7;9(8):1449-60. doi: 10.2215/CJN.05350513. Epub 2014 Jun 26.
5
Factors that affect deceased donor liver transplantation rates in the United States in addition to the Model for End-stage Liver Disease score.除终末期肝病模型评分外,影响美国尸体供肝移植率的因素。
Liver Transpl. 2012 Dec;18(12):1456-63. doi: 10.1002/lt.23548.
6
Improving Liver Allocation Using Optimized Neighborhoods.利用优化邻域改善肝脏分配
Transplantation. 2017 Feb;101(2):350-359. doi: 10.1097/TP.0000000000001505.
7
Following the organ supply: assessing the benefit of inter-DSA travel in liver transplantation.器官供应后:评估肝移植中跨区域分配系统旅行的获益。
Transplantation. 2013 Jan 27;95(2):361-71. doi: 10.1097/TP.0b013e3182737cfb.
8
Analysis of Liver Offers to Pediatric Candidates on the Transplant Wait List.对移植等待名单上儿科候选者肝脏供体情况的分析。
Gastroenterology. 2017 Oct;153(4):988-995. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2017.06.053. Epub 2017 Jul 13.
9
Offer acceptance practices and geographic variability in allocation model for end-stage liver disease at transplant.肝移植终末期肝病分配模型中的供体接受行为和地域差异。
Liver Transpl. 2018 Apr;24(4):478-487. doi: 10.1002/lt.25010.
10
Liver sharing and organ procurement organization performance.肝脏分配与器官获取组织的绩效
Liver Transpl. 2015 Mar;21(3):293-9. doi: 10.1002/lt.24074.

引用本文的文献

1
Sex-based disparities in delisting for being "too sick" for liver transplantation.基于性别的肝移植“病得太重”被取消资格的差异。
Am J Transplant. 2018 May;18(5):1214-1219. doi: 10.1111/ajt.14608. Epub 2017 Dec 28.
2
Share 35 changes in center-level liver acceptance practices.分享中心层面肝脏接受标准的35项变化。
Liver Transpl. 2017 May;23(5):604-613. doi: 10.1002/lt.24749.
3
Liver transplant center variability in accepting organ offers and its impact on patient survival.肝移植中心在接受器官供体方面的差异及其对患者生存率的影响。
J Hepatol. 2016 Apr;64(4):843-51. doi: 10.1016/j.jhep.2015.11.015. Epub 2015 Nov 25.

本文引用的文献

1
Truth and consequences: the challenge of greater transparency in liver distribution and utilization.真相与后果:肝脏分配与利用中提高透明度面临的挑战。
Am J Transplant. 2012 Apr;12(4):808-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2011.03960.x.
2
Patient, center and geographic characteristics of nationally placed livers.全国范围内肝脏移植的患者、中心和地理位置特征。
Am J Transplant. 2012 Apr;12(4):947-53. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2011.03962.x. Epub 2012 Feb 2.
3
The interaction among donor characteristics, severity of liver disease, and the cost of liver transplantation.供体特征、肝病严重程度和肝移植成本之间的相互作用。
Liver Transpl. 2011 Mar;17(3):233-42. doi: 10.1002/lt.22230.
4
Characteristics associated with liver graft failure: the concept of a donor risk index.与肝移植失败相关的特征:供体风险指数的概念
Am J Transplant. 2006 Apr;6(4):783-90. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2006.01242.x.

按捐赠服务区划分的全国性肝脏分配模式。

Offer patterns of nationally placed livers by donation service area.

机构信息

Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Medicine, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA 94143, USA.

出版信息

Liver Transpl. 2013 Apr;19(4):404-10. doi: 10.1002/lt.23604. Epub 2013 Mar 17.

DOI:10.1002/lt.23604
PMID:23447450
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3689315/
Abstract

We previously reported that national liver distribution is highly concentrated in 6 US centers, and this raises the possibility of expedited placement. Therefore, we evaluated all national offers of nationally placed livers (n=1625) to adult wait-list candidates from February 2005 to January 2010. We developed a model to predict national utilization pathways; pathways exceeding the best-fit linear unbiased predictions by ≥3 standard errors were defined as preferred. All 51 donation service areas (DSAs) placed 1 or more livers nationally, but the percentage per DSA ranged from 1% to 36%. Of 2830 possible national DSA-center pathways, 87% were used. Five hundred eighty livers (36%) were accepted on the first national offer. Four DSAs accounted for 47% of first-national-offer livers, and 44% of these were accepted by a single center. In comparison with first-offer livers using nonpreferred pathways, first offers along a preferred pathway were offered to fewer status 1 candidates (19% versus 61%) and had lower median model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) scores (22 versus 36, P<0.001). In conclusion, DSA placement patterns of national livers vary widely, with 4 DSAs exporting a high proportion of national livers on the first national offer to non-status 1 candidates with MELD scores less than their local transplant MELD scores. Although this practice may facilitate liver placement, it raises the possibility of expedience trumping patient need. Here we propose changes to the national liver distribution system that will help to balance equity, efficiency, and transparency.

摘要

我们之前曾报道,全美范围内的肝脏分配高度集中在 6 个美国中心,这增加了快速安置的可能性。因此,我们评估了从 2005 年 2 月至 2010 年 1 月期间,所有向成人等候名单候选人提供的全国范围内已安置肝脏(n=1625)的国家供应情况。我们建立了一个模型来预测全国利用途径;超过最佳拟合线性无偏预测值 3 个标准差的途径被定义为首选。所有 51 个捐赠服务区域(DSA)都在全国范围内进行了 1 次或多次肝脏安置,但每个 DSA 的比例范围从 1%到 36%不等。在 2830 个可能的全国 DSA-中心途径中,有 87%得到了利用。580 个肝脏(36%)在第一次全国提供时被接受。有 4 个 DSA 提供了 47%的首次全国供肝,其中 44%被一个中心接受。与使用非首选途径的首次供肝相比,首选途径的首次供肝被提供给较少的 1 级候选人(19%对 61%),中位终末期肝病模型(MELD)评分也较低(22 对 36,P<0.001)。总之,全国范围内肝脏的 DSA 安置模式差异很大,有 4 个 DSA 首次全国供肝的高比例流向非 1 级候选者,这些候选者的 MELD 评分低于其当地移植 MELD 评分。尽管这种做法可能有助于肝脏的安置,但它增加了便利胜过患者需求的可能性。在这里,我们提出了对全国肝脏分配系统的一些改变,这将有助于平衡公平、效率和透明度。