Singhal Ashish, Wima Koffi, Hoehn Richard S, Quillin R Cutler, Woodle E Steve, Paquette Ian M, Paterno Flavio, Abbott Daniel E, Shah Shimul A
Cincinnati Research in Outcomes and Safety in Surgery (CROSS), Department of Surgery, University of Cincinnati Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH.
Cincinnati Research in Outcomes and Safety in Surgery (CROSS), Department of Surgery, University of Cincinnati Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH.
J Am Coll Surg. 2015 May;220(5):951-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2015.01.052. Epub 2015 Feb 11.
Although donation after cardiac death (DCD) liver allografts have been used to expand the donor pool, concerns exist regarding primary nonfunction and biliary complications. Our aim was to compare resource use and outcomes of DCD allografts with donation after brain death (DBD) liver allografts.
Using a linkage between the University HealthSystem Consortium and Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients databases, we identified 11,856 patients who underwent deceased donor liver transplantation (LT) from 2007 to 2011. Patients were divided into 2 cohorts based on type of allograft (DCD vs DBD). Matched pair analysis (n = 613 in each group) was used to compare outcomes of the 2 donor types.
Donation after cardiac death allografts comprised 5.2% (n = 613) of all LTs in the studied cohort; DCD allograft recipients were healthier and had lower median Model of End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score (17 vs 19; p < 0.0001). Post LT, there was no significant difference in length of stay, perioperative mortality, and discharge to home rates. However, DCD allografts were associated with higher direct cost ($110,414 vs $99,543; p < 0.0001) and 30-day readmission rates (46.4% vs 37.1%; p < 0.0001). Matched analysis revealed that DCD allografts were associated with higher direct cost, readmission rates, and inferior graft survival.
While confirming the previous reports of inferior graft survival associated with DCD allografts, this is the first national report to show increased financial and resource use associated with DCD compared with DBD allografts in a matched recipient cohort.
尽管心脏死亡后捐赠(DCD)的肝脏移植已被用于扩大供体库,但人们对原发性无功能和胆道并发症仍存在担忧。我们的目的是比较DCD移植肝与脑死亡后捐赠(DBD)移植肝的资源使用情况和结局。
利用大学卫生系统联盟与移植受者科学登记数据库之间的关联,我们确定了2007年至2011年接受尸体供肝移植(LT)的11,856例患者。根据移植肝类型(DCD与DBD)将患者分为两个队列。采用配对分析(每组n = 613)比较两种供体类型的结局。
在研究队列中,心脏死亡后捐赠的移植肝占所有肝移植的5.2%(n = 613);DCD移植肝受者更健康,终末期肝病模型(MELD)评分中位数更低(17对19;p < 0.0001)。肝移植后,住院时间、围手术期死亡率和出院回家率无显著差异。然而,DCD移植肝的直接成本更高(110,414美元对99,543美元;p < 0.0001),30天再入院率更高(46.4%对37.1%;p < 0.0001)。配对分析显示,DCD移植肝与更高的直接成本、再入院率以及较差的移植肝存活率相关。
在证实先前关于DCD移植肝移植肝存活率较差的报道的同时,这是第一份全国性报告,表明在匹配的受者队列中,与DBD移植肝相比,DCD移植肝的财务和资源使用增加。