• 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

新心脏分配政策下高优先级名单状态的中心间差异。

Between-center variation in high-priority listing status under the new heart allocation policy.

机构信息

Pritzker School of Medicine, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois.

Department of Medicine, UT San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas.

出版信息

Am J Transplant. 2021 Nov;21(11):3684-3693. doi: 10.1111/ajt.16614. Epub 2021 May 5.

DOI:10.1111/ajt.16614
PMID:33864733
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8729112/
Abstract

Under the new US heart allocation policy, transplant centers listed significantly more candidates at high priority statuses (Status 1 and 2) with mechanical circulatory support devices than expected. We determined whether the practice change was widespread or concentrated among certain transplant centers. Using data from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients, we used mixed-effect logistic regression to compare the observed listings of adult, heart-alone transplant candidates post-policy (December 2018 to February 2020) to seasonally matched pre-policy cohort (December 2016 to February 2018). US transplant centers (N = 96) listed similar number of candidates in each policy period (4472 vs. 4498) but listed significantly more at high priority status (25.5% vs. 7.0%, p < .001) than expected. Adjusted for candidate characteristics, 91 of 96 (94.8%) centers listed significantly more candidates at high-priority status than expected, with the unexpected increase varying from 4.8% to 50.4% (interquartile range [IQR]: 14.0%-23.3%). Centers in OPOs with highest Status 1A transplant rate pre-policy were significantly more likely to utilize high-priority status under the new policy (OR: 9.73, p = .01). The new heart allocation policy was associated with widespread and significantly variable changes in transplant center practice that may undermine the effectiveness of the new system.

摘要

根据美国新的心脏分配政策,移植中心列出的具有机械循环支持装置的高优先级状态(1 级和 2 级)的候选人数明显高于预期。我们确定这种做法的改变是广泛的还是集中在某些移植中心。我们使用移植受者科学登记处的数据,使用混合效应逻辑回归来比较政策后(2018 年 12 月至 2020 年 2 月)成人、心脏单独移植候选者的观察列表与政策前季节性匹配队列(2016 年 12 月至 2018 年 2 月)。美国移植中心(N=96)在每个政策期列出的候选人数相似(4472 与 4498),但在高优先级状态下列出的人数明显更多(25.5%与 7.0%,p<.001),超出预期。在调整候选者特征后,96 个中心中的 91 个(94.8%)列出的高优先级状态候选者明显多于预期,意外增加幅度从 4.8%到 50.4%(四分位距 [IQR]:14.0%-23.3%)。政策前具有最高 1A 级移植率的器官获取组织中,在新政策下更有可能利用高优先级状态(OR:9.73,p=.01)。新的心脏分配政策与移植中心实践的广泛且显著变化相关,这可能会破坏新系统的有效性。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0707/8729112/82b7b059162b/nihms-1762837-f0003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0707/8729112/b3f3eebae633/nihms-1762837-f0001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0707/8729112/711258e1d15c/nihms-1762837-f0002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0707/8729112/82b7b059162b/nihms-1762837-f0003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0707/8729112/b3f3eebae633/nihms-1762837-f0001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0707/8729112/711258e1d15c/nihms-1762837-f0002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0707/8729112/82b7b059162b/nihms-1762837-f0003.jpg

相似文献

1
Between-center variation in high-priority listing status under the new heart allocation policy.新心脏分配政策下高优先级名单状态的中心间差异。
Am J Transplant. 2021 Nov;21(11):3684-3693. doi: 10.1111/ajt.16614. Epub 2021 May 5.
2
Practice Changes at U.S. Transplant Centers After the New Adult Heart Allocation Policy.美国移植中心新成人心脏分配政策后的实践变化。
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2020 Jun 16;75(23):2906-2916. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2020.01.066.
3
Life expectancy without a transplant for status 1A liver transplant candidates.1A 期肝移植候选者不进行移植的预期寿命。
Am J Transplant. 2022 Jan;22(1):274-278. doi: 10.1111/ajt.16830. Epub 2021 Sep 15.
4
Trends in the Use of Inotropes to List Adult Heart Transplant Candidates at Status 1A.将成人心脏移植候选人列为1A状态时使用血管活性药物的趋势。
Circ Heart Fail. 2017 Dec;10(12). doi: 10.1161/CIRCHEARTFAILURE.117.004483.
5
A national assessment of one-year heart outcomes after the 2018 adult heart allocation change.2018年成人心脏分配变更后一年心脏结局的全国评估。
J Heart Lung Transplant. 2023 Feb;42(2):196-205. doi: 10.1016/j.healun.2022.08.018. Epub 2022 Aug 28.
6
Outcomes of Multiple Listing for Adult Heart Transplantation in the United States: Analysis of OPTN Data From 2000 to 2013.美国成人心脏移植多重登记的结果:对2000年至2013年器官共享联合网络数据的分析
JACC Heart Fail. 2015 Dec;3(12):933-41. doi: 10.1016/j.jchf.2015.07.012. Epub 2015 Nov 11.
7
Impact of the 2016 revision of US Pediatric Heart Allocation Policy on waitlist characteristics and outcomes.2016 年美国儿科心脏分配政策修订版对等待名单特征和结果的影响。
Am J Transplant. 2019 Dec;19(12):3276-3283. doi: 10.1111/ajt.15567. Epub 2019 Sep 22.
8
Pediatric heart transplant waiting times in the United States since the 2016 allocation policy change.自2016年分配政策变更以来美国儿童心脏移植等待时间
Am J Transplant. 2022 Mar;22(3):833-842. doi: 10.1111/ajt.16921. Epub 2022 Feb 8.
9
A challenge to equity in transplantation: Increased center-level variation in short-term mechanical circulatory support use in the context of the updated U.S. heart transplant allocation policy.移植中的公平性挑战:在美国新版心脏移植分配政策背景下,短期机械循环支持使用的中心间差异增大。
J Heart Lung Transplant. 2022 Jan;41(1):95-103. doi: 10.1016/j.healun.2021.09.004. Epub 2021 Sep 16.
10
Transplant Center Variability in Organ Offer Acceptance and Mortality Among US Patients on the Heart Transplant Waitlist.美国心脏移植候补患者中器官提供接受率和死亡率的移植中心变异性。
JAMA Cardiol. 2020 Jun 1;5(6):660-668. doi: 10.1001/jamacardio.2020.0659.

引用本文的文献

1
Association of the 2018 U.S. Heart Allocation Policy Change and the Survival Benefit of Heart Transplantation.2018年美国心脏分配政策变化与心脏移植生存获益的关联
JACC Heart Fail. 2025 Jul;13(7):102480. doi: 10.1016/j.jchf.2025.02.026. Epub 2025 Jun 4.
2
Policy and Oversight of Cardiac Transplantation.心脏移植的政策与监督
Methodist Debakey Cardiovasc J. 2025 May 15;21(3):83-91. doi: 10.14797/mdcvj.1567. eCollection 2025.
3
Clinical Outcomes for Heart-Alone and Multiorgan Transplant Under the New Heart Allocation Policy Era.

本文引用的文献

1
Evolving Trends in Adult Heart Transplant With the 2018 Heart Allocation Policy Change.2018 年心脏分配政策变化后成人心脏移植的发展趋势。
JAMA Cardiol. 2021 Feb 1;6(2):159-167. doi: 10.1001/jamacardio.2020.4909.
2
Intra-Aortic Balloon Pump Bridging to Heart Transplantation: Impact of the 2018 Allocation Change.主动脉内球囊泵桥接心脏移植:2018 年分配变更的影响。
Circ Heart Fail. 2020 Aug;13(8):e006971. doi: 10.1161/CIRCHEARTFAILURE.120.006971. Epub 2020 Aug 6.
3
Practice Changes at U.S. Transplant Centers After the New Adult Heart Allocation Policy.
新心脏分配政策时代心脏单独移植和多器官移植的临床结果
J Am Heart Assoc. 2025 Apr;14(7):e036687. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.124.036687. Epub 2025 Mar 27.
4
Haemodynamic effects of intra-aortic balloon pumps stratified by baseline pulmonary artery pulsatility index.根据基线肺动脉搏动指数分层的主动脉内球囊泵的血流动力学效应
ESC Heart Fail. 2025 Feb;12(1):316-325. doi: 10.1002/ehf2.15083. Epub 2024 Sep 18.
5
Increased disparities in waitlist and post-heart transplantation outcomes according to socioeconomic status with the new heart transplant allocation system.新的心脏移植分配系统下,社会经济地位与等待名单和心脏移植后结果的差距加大。
J Heart Lung Transplant. 2024 Jan;43(1):134-147. doi: 10.1016/j.healun.2023.08.016. Epub 2023 Aug 27.
6
Association of high-priority exceptions with waitlist mortality among heart transplant candidates.高优先级例外与心脏移植候选者候补名单死亡率的关联。
J Heart Lung Transplant. 2023 Sep;42(9):1175-1182. doi: 10.1016/j.healun.2023.05.009. Epub 2023 May 22.
7
Greater geographic sharing and heart transplantation waitlist outcomes following the 2018 heart allocation policy.2018 年心脏分配政策实施后,心脏移植候补名单的地理分配更加广泛,等待移植的结果也更好。
J Heart Lung Transplant. 2023 Jul;42(7):936-942. doi: 10.1016/j.healun.2023.02.003. Epub 2023 Feb 19.
8
A bridge to nowhere: The durable left ventricular assist device dilemma in the new heart allocation system.一座通往虚无之地的桥梁:新心脏分配系统中耐用左心室辅助装置的困境
J Heart Lung Transplant. 2023 Jan;42(1):87-88. doi: 10.1016/j.healun.2022.10.012. Epub 2022 Oct 29.
9
Comparison of Accuracy of Estimation of Cardiac Output by Thermodilution Versus the Fick Method Using Measured Oxygen Uptake.经测量氧摄取量比较热稀释法与 Fick 法测定心输出量的准确性。
Am J Cardiol. 2022 Aug 1;176:58-65. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2022.04.026. Epub 2022 May 22.
10
An updated estimate of posttransplant survival after implementation of the new donor heart allocation policy.新的供体心脏分配政策实施后移植后生存率的最新估计。
Am J Transplant. 2022 Jun;22(6):1683-1690. doi: 10.1111/ajt.16931. Epub 2022 Jan 6.
美国移植中心新成人心脏分配政策后的实践变化。
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2020 Jun 16;75(23):2906-2916. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2020.01.066.
4
A change of heart: Preliminary results of the US 2018 adult heart allocation revision.心动之变:美国 2018 年成人心脏分配修订的初步结果。
Am J Transplant. 2020 Oct;20(10):2781-2790. doi: 10.1111/ajt.16010. Epub 2020 Jun 14.
5
Trends in Mechanical Support Use as a Bridge to Adult Heart Transplant Under New Allocation Rules.新型分配规则下机械支持作为成人心脏移植桥接的使用趋势。
JAMA Cardiol. 2020 Jun 1;5(6):728-729. doi: 10.1001/jamacardio.2020.0667.
6
Use of Temporary Mechanical Circulatory Support for Management of Cardiogenic Shock Before and After the United Network for Organ Sharing Donor Heart Allocation System Changes.使用临时机械循环支持在器官共享联合网络供心分配系统改变前后管理心原性休克。
JAMA Cardiol. 2020 Jun 1;5(6):703-708. doi: 10.1001/jamacardio.2020.0692.
7
Association of Transplant Center With Survival Benefit Among Adults Undergoing Heart Transplant in the United States.美国接受心脏移植的成年人中,移植中心与生存获益的关联。
JAMA. 2019 Nov 12;322(18):1789-1798. doi: 10.1001/jama.2019.15686.
8
The Blurred Line Between Gaming and Patient Advocacy: Heart Transplant Listing Decisions in the Modern Era.游戏与患者权益倡导之间的模糊界限:现代心脏移植名单决策
Circulation. 2019 Dec 17;140(25):2048-2050. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.119.043034. Epub 2019 Sep 18.
9
Geographic Variation in the Treatment of U.S. Adult Heart Transplant Candidates.美国成人心脏移植候选者治疗的地域差异。
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018 Apr 24;71(16):1715-1725. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2018.02.030.
10
Potential impact of a shock requirement on adult heart allocation.休克标准对成人心脏分配的潜在影响。
J Heart Lung Transplant. 2017 Sep;36(9):1013-1016. doi: 10.1016/j.healun.2017.05.015. Epub 2017 May 17.