Introduction: Multiple factors contribute to the overall outcome in donation after circulatory death liver transplantation. The majority is however inconsistently reported with various acceptance criteria and thresholds, when to decline a specific graft. Recent improvement in outcome was based on an increased awareness of the cumulative risk, combining donor and recipient parameters, which encouraged the community to accept livers with an overall higher risk. Areas covered: This review pictures the large number of risk factors in this field with a special focus on parameters, which contribute to available prediction models. Next, features of the recently developed UK-DCD-Risk-Score, which led to a significantly impaired graft survival, above a suggested threshold of >10 score points, are discussed. The clinical impact of this new model on the background of other prediction tools with their subsequent limitations is highlighted in a next chapter. Finally, we provide suggestions, how to further improve outcomes in this challenging field of transplantation. Expert opinion: Despite the recent development of new prediction models, including the UK-DCD-Risk-Score, which provides a sufficient prediction of graft loss after DCD liver transplantation, the consideration of other confounders is essential to better understand the overall risk and metabolic liver status to improve the comparability of clinical studies. More uniform definitions and thresholds of individual risk factors are required.

The UK-DCD-Risk-Score - practical and new guidance for allocation of a specific organ to a recipient? / A. Schlegel, M. Kalisvaart, I. Scalera, J. Isaac, P. Dutkowski, P. Muiesan. - In: EXPERT REVIEW OF GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY. - ISSN 1747-4124. - 13:8(2019), pp. 771-783. [10.1080/17474124.2019.1629286]

The UK-DCD-Risk-Score - practical and new guidance for allocation of a specific organ to a recipient?

P. Muiesan
Ultimo
2019

Abstract

Introduction: Multiple factors contribute to the overall outcome in donation after circulatory death liver transplantation. The majority is however inconsistently reported with various acceptance criteria and thresholds, when to decline a specific graft. Recent improvement in outcome was based on an increased awareness of the cumulative risk, combining donor and recipient parameters, which encouraged the community to accept livers with an overall higher risk. Areas covered: This review pictures the large number of risk factors in this field with a special focus on parameters, which contribute to available prediction models. Next, features of the recently developed UK-DCD-Risk-Score, which led to a significantly impaired graft survival, above a suggested threshold of >10 score points, are discussed. The clinical impact of this new model on the background of other prediction tools with their subsequent limitations is highlighted in a next chapter. Finally, we provide suggestions, how to further improve outcomes in this challenging field of transplantation. Expert opinion: Despite the recent development of new prediction models, including the UK-DCD-Risk-Score, which provides a sufficient prediction of graft loss after DCD liver transplantation, the consideration of other confounders is essential to better understand the overall risk and metabolic liver status to improve the comparability of clinical studies. More uniform definitions and thresholds of individual risk factors are required.
allocation; Donation after circulatory death; donor-recipient match; risk factors; UK-DCD-Risk-Score
Settore MED/18 - Chirurgia Generale
2019
Article (author)
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
1-s2.0-S0168827817324327-main.pdf

accesso riservato

Descrizione: Research Article
Tipologia: Publisher's version/PDF
Dimensione 766.4 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
766.4 kB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia
Pubblicazioni consigliate

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/2434/960996
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 9
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 9
social impact