Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 5, 2025
Author Spotlight: Enhancing Graft Viability Assessment Through Quantitative Metrics and Innovative Reservoir Systems
Published on: August 2, 2024
Advantages and Limitations of Clinical Scores for Donation After Circulatory Death Liver Transplantation
Raphael P H Meier1,2, Yvonne Kelly1, Seiji Yamaguchi1
1Division of Transplant Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, United States.
Insights
Simple and comprehensive scoring systems for liver transplantation using donation after circulatory death (DCD) donors can predict graft survival. Tailoring these scores to local conditions is crucial for expanding DCD utilization.
Area of Science:
- Hepatology and Transplant Surgery
- Organ Donation and Transplantation Research
- Medical Informatics and Predictive Modeling
Background:
- Scoring systems are used to select donors and recipients for liver transplantation (LT) from donation after circulatory death (DCD) donors.
- Complex scoring systems developed in large datasets may not accurately predict local outcomes.
- The study investigates the efficacy of tailored versus universal scoring systems for DCD liver transplantation.
Purpose of the Study:
- To design, validate, and compare a simple index and a universal-comprehensive (UC)-DCD score for predicting DCD-LT graft survival.
- To assess the performance of these scores against previously published DCD scoring systems.
- To determine the impact of local circumstances on the predictive accuracy of DCD risk scores.
Main Methods:
- Developed a simple total warm ischemia time (WIT)-index (donor WIT [dWIT] and hepatectomy time [dHep]) using the UCSF cohort (n=136).
- Developed a universal-comprehensive (UC)-DCD score using the UNOS cohort (n=5,792), including dWIT, dHep, recipient ventilation status, transjugular-intrahepatic-portosystemic-shunt, liver disease etiology, MELD, BMI, donor/recipient age, and cold ischemia time.
- Compared the predictive performance of the developed scores against existing DCD scoring systems using multivariate logistic regression and AUC analysis.
Main Results:
- The UC-DCD score demonstrated superior performance in predicting DCD-LT graft survival in the UNOS cohort (AUC: 0.635) compared to previous scores (≤0.562).
- The total WIT index effectively stratified survival and biliary complications in the UCSF cohort, outperforming other scores.
- Local factors significantly influenced the predictive accuracy of DCD risk scores.
Conclusions:
- DCD risk scores derived from large cohorts offer general guidance for donor and recipient selection in liver transplantation.
- Tailoring DCD risk scores to non-/partially-modifiable local circumstances is essential for optimizing DCD utilization.
- The findings support the need for localized adjustments to scoring systems to improve DCD liver transplant outcomes.
Abstract:
Background: Scoring systems have been proposed to select donation after circulatory death (DCD) donors and recipients for liver transplantation (LT). We hypothesized that complex scoring systems derived in large datasets might not predict outcomes locally. Methods: Based on 1-year DCD-LT graft survival predictors in multivariate logistic regression models, we designed, validated, and compared a simple index using the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) cohort (n = 136) and a universal-comprehensive (UC)-DCD score using the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) cohort (n = 5,792) to previously published DCD scoring systems. Results: The total warm ischemia time (WIT)-index included donor WIT (dWIT) and hepatectomy time (dHep). The UC-DCD score included dWIT, dHep, recipient on mechanical ventilation, transjugular-intrahepatic-portosystemic-shunt, cause of liver disease, model for end-stage liver disease, body mass index, donor/recipient age, and cold ischemia time. In the UNOS cohort, the UC-score outperformed all previously published scores in predicting DCD-LT graft survival (AUC: 0.635 vs. ≤0.562). In the UCSF cohort, the total WIT index successfully stratified survival and biliary complications, whereas other scores did not. Conclusion: DCD risk scores generated in large cohorts provide general guidance for safe recipient/donor selection, but they must be tailored based on non-/partially-modifiable local circumstances to expand DCD utilization.
Related Concept Videos
01:28Kidney Transplant I: Introduction
01:22Effect of Hepatic Disease on Pharmacokinetics: Pathophysiologic Assessment and Liver Function Test