Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

MELD/PELD: one year later.

R B Freeman1

  • 1Department of Surgery, Division of Transplantation, New England Medical Center/Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts 02111, USA. rfreeman@tufts-nemc.org

Transplantation Proceedings
|November 13, 2003
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

A consolidated biovigilance system for blood, tissue and organs: one size does not fit all.

American journal of transplantation : official journal of the American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons·2012
Same author

Variation in health care delivery: the example of exception awards in liver transplantation.

American journal of transplantation : official journal of the American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons·2011
Same author

The impact of variation in donation after cardiac death policies among donor hospitals: a regional analysis.

American journal of transplantation : official journal of the American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons·2011
Same author

Characterization of the withdrawal phase in a porcine donation after the cardiac death model.

American journal of transplantation : official journal of the American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons·2011
Same author

Transplant data collection: you get what you pay for.

American journal of transplantation : official journal of the American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons·2010
Same author

Progress in education as it concerns industrial nursing.

Public health nursing·2010
Same journal

Analysis of the Cost of Maintaining Effective Donors and Nondonors of Organs and Tissues in Intensive Care Units.

Transplantation proceedings·2026
Same journal

Adolescence and Pediatric Heart Transplantation: Impact of Non-Adherence on Mortality: A Single-Center Experience.

Transplantation proceedings·2026
Same journal

Impact of Family-Based Care on the Outcome of Brain Death and Humanization in the Process of Multiple Organ Donation: Case Report.

Transplantation proceedings·2026
Same journal

Karnofsky Performance Status Is Associated with Patient and Graft Survival After Liver Retransplantation.

Transplantation proceedings·2026
Same journal

Evaluating CMV Risk Stratification, Donor Characteristics, and Post-Transplant Outcomes in Kidney Transplant Recipients: A Retrospective Eurotransplant Center Analysis.

Transplantation proceedings·2026
Same journal

Twenty-One Years of Insights From A Single-Center Living Kidney Donation Program.

Transplantation proceedings·2026
See all related articles

The US liver allocation policy shifted to a continuous scale, prioritizing patient-specific needs over waiting time. This change resulted in fewer waiting list removals and more transplants, particularly for liver cancer patients, without impacting survival rates.

Area of Science:

  • Transplantation Medicine
  • Public Health Policy
  • Organ Allocation Systems

Background:

  • The previous US liver allocation system relied on a categorical approach with significant weight on waiting time.
  • Dissatisfaction with the old system stemmed from its poor discrimination of medical urgency and lengthy waiting periods.
  • A new policy was implemented to create a more objective and patient-specific system for ranking liver transplant candidates.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To evaluate the impact of the revised US liver allocation policy implemented in February 2002.
  • To compare liver allocation outcomes before and after the policy change.
  • To assess changes in waiting list dynamics, transplant numbers, and patient survival.

Main Methods:

  • Comparative analysis of liver allocation data from two 6-month periods: pre-policy change (Feb-Aug 2001) and post-policy change (Feb-Aug 2002).
Keywords:
Empirical ApproachHealth Care and Public Health

Related Experiment Videos

  • Examination of waiting list registrations, removals (due to death or "too sick"), and the number of cadaveric liver transplants.
  • Specific analysis of outcomes for patients with hepatocellular cancer.

    • Main Results:

    • Fewer patients were registered on the waiting list under the new policy.
    • There was a decrease in waiting list removals due to death or being "too sick."
    • An increase in the number of cadaveric liver transplants was observed, with a significant rise in transplants for patients with hepatocellular cancer.

    Conclusions:

    • The new US liver allocation policy provides a more objective, patient-specific system for ranking candidates.
    • The policy has successfully increased the number of liver transplants, especially for patients with specific conditions like cancer.
    • While improvements are ongoing, the new system represents a positive step in liver allocation, with early post-transplant survival remaining stable.