Department of Surgery, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA.
National Clinician Scholars Program, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA.
Liver Transpl. 2023 Sep 1;29(9):987-997. doi: 10.1097/LVT.0000000000000182. Epub 2023 May 29.
Since the Final Rule regarding transplantation was published in 1999, organ distribution policies have been implemented to reduce geographic disparity. While a recent change in liver allocation, termed acuity circles, eliminated the donor service area as a unit of distribution to decrease the geographic disparity of waitlisted patients to liver transplantation, recently published results highlight the complexity of addressing geographic disparity. From geographic variation in donor supply, as well as liver disease burden and differing model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) scores of candidates and MELD scores necessary to receive liver transplantation, to the urban-rural disparity in specialty care access, and to neighborhood deprivation (community measure of socioeconomic status) in liver transplant access, addressing disparities of access will require a multipronged approach at the patient, transplant center, and national level. Herein, we review the current knowledge of these disparities-from variation in larger (regional) to smaller (census tract or zip code) levels to the common etiologies of liver disease, which are particularly affected by these geographic boundaries. The geographic disparity in liver transplant access must balance the limited organ supply with the growing demand. We must identify patient-level factors that contribute to their geographic disparity and incorporate these findings at the transplant center level to develop targeted interventions. We must simultaneously work at the national level to standardize and share patient data (including socioeconomic status and geographic social deprivation indices) to better understand the factors that contribute to the geographic disparity. The complex interplay between organ distribution policy, referral patterns, and variable waitlisting practices with the proportion of high MELD patients and differences in potential donor supply must all be considered to create a national policy strategy to address the inequities in the system.
自 1999 年发布有关移植的最终规定以来,已经实施了器官分配政策,以减少地理差异。虽然最近对肝脏分配进行了一项名为“急性病圈”的更改,取消了作为分配单位的供体服务区,以减少等待肝移植的患者的地理差异,但最近公布的结果突出了解决地理差异的复杂性。从供体供应的地理差异,以及肝脏疾病负担和不同的终末期肝病模型(MELD)评分的候选人和接受肝移植所需的 MELD 评分,到专业医疗服务获取的城乡差异,以及肝脏移植获取中的邻里贫困(社区社会经济地位衡量标准),解决获取方面的差异将需要在患者、移植中心和国家层面采取多管齐下的方法。在此,我们回顾了这些差异的现有知识,包括从较大(区域)到较小(普查区或邮政编码)的差异,以及肝脏疾病的常见病因,这些差异特别受到这些地理边界的影响。肝脏移植获取的地理差异必须平衡有限的器官供应与不断增长的需求。我们必须确定导致患者地理差异的因素,并将这些发现纳入移植中心层面,以制定有针对性的干预措施。我们必须同时在国家层面努力规范和共享患者数据(包括社会经济地位和地理社会剥夺指数),以更好地了解导致地理差异的因素。器官分配政策、转诊模式和可变的等待名单实践之间的复杂相互作用,以及高 MELD 患者的比例和潜在供体供应的差异,都必须加以考虑,以制定解决该系统不公平现象的国家政策战略。