The model for end-stage liver disease comes of age

"Just" accuracy? Procedural fairness demands explainability in AI-based medical resource allocations

The increasing application of artificial intelligence (AI) to healthcare raises both hope and ethical concerns. Some advanced machine learning methods provide accurate clinical predictions at the expense of a significant lack of explainability. Alex John London has defended that accuracy is a more important value than explainability in AI medicine. In this article, we locate the trade-off between accurate performance and explainable algorithms in the context of distributive justice. We acknowledge that accuracy is cardinal from outcome-oriented justice because it helps to maximize patients' benefits and optimizes limited resources. However, we claim that the opaqueness of the algorithmic black box and its absence of explainability threatens core commitments of procedural fairness such as accountability, avoidance of bias, and transparency. To illustrate this, we discuss liver transplantation as a case of critical medical resources in which the lack of explainability in AI-based allocation algorithms is procedurally unfair. Finally, we provide a number of ethical recommendations for when considering the use of unexplainable algorithms in the distribution of health-related resources.

Basic principles of liver allocation and development over the years

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Prior to the enactment of the National Organ Transplant Act in 1984, there was no organized system to allocate donor organs in the United States. The process of liver allocation has come a long way since then, including the development and implementation of the Model for End-stage Liver Disease, which is an objective estimate of risk of mortality among candidates awaiting liver transplantation.

RECENT FINDINGS

The Liver Transplant Community is constantly working to optimize the distribution and allocation of scare organs, which is essential to promote equitable access to a life-saving procedure in the setting of clinical advances in the treatment of liver disease. Over the past 17 years, many changes have been made. Most recently, liver distribution changed such that deceased donor livers will be distributed based on units established by geographic circles around a donor hospital rather than the current policy, which uses donor service areas as the unit of distribution. In addition, a National Liver Review Board was created to standardize the process of determining liver transplant priority for candidates with exceptional medical conditions. The aim of these changes is to allocate and distribute organs in an efficient and equitable fashion.

SUMMARY

The current review provides a historical perspective of liver allocation and the changing landscape in the United States.

Selection of patients with hepatocellular cancer: a difficult balancing between equity, utility, and benefit

Although liver transplantation (LT) represents the gold-standard strategy for hepatocellular cancer (HCC), its use is circumscribed by several factors like donor shortage, perioperative complications, or competition with other candidates without HCC. Moreover, different alternative approaches like resection or loco-regional therapies may be attempted in selected cases. The best option for the treatment of an HCC patient is a complex decision, involving several ethical principles including: equity (horizontal equity and vertical equity or urgency), and utility. These principles influence the different phases of the patient selection process for LT: inscription in the waiting list (WL), deciding upon patient priority and drop-out before LT, allocating the liver donor to the best matched recipient. The best end-point for describing the principle of utility is the "transplant benefit" (TB). This concept expresses the survival gain obtained comparing LT with the best alternative therapies (i.e., difference between life years obtained with and without LT). The TB used with a mid-term time horizon (post-transplant 5-10 years), has the intrinsic potential to reach the dignity of an independent LT selection principle. Thus, the present review investigates the role of organ allocation using a TB model with the intent to introduce equity among patients transplanted having HCC or non-tumoral diseases.

Predicting mortality of patients with cirrhosis admitted to medical intensive care unit: An experience of a single tertiary center

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

Prognosis for patients with cirrhosis admitted to a medical intensive care unit (MICU) is poor and no previous studies have been published from Qatar or other countries in the region to investigate this issue. The objective of this study was to assess the predictors for in-hospital mortality and admission of cirrhotic patients to MICU in a single tertiary hospital in Qatar.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

All adult cirrhotic MICU patients hospitalized from 2007 through 2012 to Hamad General Hospital-Qatar were included. We compared them to cirrhotic patients admitted to medical wards during same period of time. All data were recorded and analyzed with respect to demographic parameters, clinical features and laboratory as well as radiology characteristics on day one of admission to MICU. Cirrhosis diagnosis was established either with a liver biopsy or the combination of physical, laboratory and radiologic findings. Predictors of mortality were defined by logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

The cohort comprised 109 cirrhotic MICU patients (86.2% males), and their mean age±SD was 51.6±11.5. MICU-cirrhotic patients had longer hospital stays than medical wards-cirrhotic patients (p=0.01). Admission with severe hepatic encephalopathy, upper gastrointestinal bleeding and SOFA (Sepsis Related Organ Failure Assessment) score were the independent predicting factors for MICU admission. Mortality was higher for the MICU-cirrhotic group than medical wards group (27 (24.8%) deaths vs. 12 (5.3%) deaths, respectively, p=0.001). In multivariate logistic regression analyses, older age>60years (p=0.04), APACH-II score (p=0.001) and MELD score (p=0.02) were independent predicting factors for overall mortality.

CONCLUSION

Severe hepatic encephalopathy, upper gastrointestinal bleeding and SOFA score predict MICU admission of cirrhotic patients. Among MICU cirrhotic patients, older age, APACH-II score and MELD score predict mortality.

Model for end-stage liver disease score and MELD exceptions: 15 years later

The model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score has been used as an objective scale of disease severity for management of patients with end-stage liver disease; it currently serves as the basis of an urgency-based organ-allocation policy in several countries. Implementation of the MELD score led to a reduction in waiting-list registration and waiting-list mortality and an increase in the number of deceased-donor transplants without adversely affecting long-term outcomes after liver transplantation (LT). The MELD score has been used for management of non-transplant patients with chronic liver disease. MELD exceptions serve as a mechanism to advance the needs of subsets of patients with liver disease not adequately addressed by MELD-based organ allocation. Several models have been proposed to refine and improve the MELD score as the environment within which it operates continues to evolve toward transplantation for sicker patients. The MELD score continues to serve and be used as a template to improve upon as an objective gauge of disease severity and as a metric enabling optimization of allocation of scarce donor organs for LT.

Transplant benefit for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma

Although liver transplantation is theoretically the best treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), it is limited by the realities of perioperative complications, and the shortage of donor organs. Furthermore, in many cases there are available alternative treatments such as resection or locoregional therapy. Deciding upon the best option for a patient with HCC is complicated, involving numerous ethical principles including: urgency, utility, intention-to-treat survival, transplant benefit, harm to candidates on waiting list, and harm to living donors. The potential contrast between different principles is particularly relevant for patients with HCC for several reasons: (1) HCC candidates to liver transplantation are increasing; (2) the great prognostic heterogeneity within the HCC population; (3) in HCC patients tumor progression before liver transplantation may significantly impair post transplant outcome; and (4) effective alternative therapies are often available for HCC candidates to liver transplantation. In this paper we suggest that allocating organs by transplant benefit could help balance these competing principles, and also introduce equity between patients with HCC and nonmalignant liver disease. We also propose a triangular equipoise model to help decide between deceased donor liver transplantation, living donor liver transplantation, or alternative therapies.

Model for end-stage liver disease: end of the first decade

The Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) score is the basis for allocation of liver allografts for transplantation in the United States. The MELD score, as an objective scale of disease severity, is also used in the management of patients with chronic liver disease in the nontransplant setting. Several models have been proposed to improve the MELD score. The authors believe that the MELD score is, by design, continually evolving and lends itself to continued refinement and improvement to serve as a metric to optimize organ allocation in the future.

Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer staging and transplant survival benefit for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: a multicentre, cohort study

BACKGROUND

Allocation of deceased-donor livers to patients with chronic liver failure is improved by prioritising patients by 5-year liver transplantation survival benefit. The Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) staging has been proposed as the standard means to assess for prognosis of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. We aimed to create a prediction model linking the BCLC stage of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma to their 5-year liver transplant benefit.

METHODS

A large cohort of consecutive patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (n=1328) from the ITA.LI.CA database (n=2951) were judged as potentially eligible for liver transplantation according to the following criteria: absence of macroscopic vascular invasion or metastases, age 70 years or younger, and absence of relevant extra-hepatic comorbidities. To assess the correlation between BCLC staging and non-liver transplantation survival, we did Cox univariate and multivariate analyses including the following covariates: BCLC stage, year of diagnosis, age, sex, cause of cirrhosis, model for end-stage liver disease score, α-fetoprotein concentrations, and treatment. Liver-transplantation survival benefit for patients was calculated, using Monte Carlo simulation analysis, as the patient's 5-year life expectancy with liver transplantation (estimated by the Metroticket model) minus the 5-year life expectancy without liver transplantation according to BCLC stage.

FINDINGS

83 (6%) of 1328 patients had BCLC 0 stage disease, 614 (46%) had BCLC A, 500 (38%) had BCLC B-C, and 131 (10%) had BCLC D. In the Cox non-liver transplantation survival multivariate model, hazard ratios associated with increasing BCLC stages were 1.530 (95% CI 1.107-2.116) for BCLC A versus BCLC 0, 1.572 (1.350-1.830) for BCLC B-C versus BCLC A, and 1.470 (1.164-1.856) for BCLC D versus BCLC B-C. Results of the Monte Carlo simulation analysis confirmed the significant effect of BCLC classification on transplant benefit; in the adjusted model, a median 5-year transplant benefit of 11.19 months (IQR 10.73-11.67) for BCLC 0, 13.49 months (11.51-15.57) for BCLC A, 17.36 months (15.06-19.28) for BCLC B-C, and 28.46 months (26.38-30.34) for BCLC D.

INTERPRETATION

Liver transplantation could result in survival benefit for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma and advanced liver cirrhosis (BCLC stage D) and in those with intermediate tumours (BCLC stages B-C), regardless of the nodule number-size criteria (ie, Milan criteria), provided that macroscopic vascular invasion and extra-hepatic disease are absent.

FUNDING

None.

Outcome predictors of cirrhotic patients with spontaneous bacterial empyema

BACKGROUND

Spontaneous bacterial empyema (SBE) is a complication of cirrhotic patients in which a pre-existing pleural effusion becomes infected. This retrospective study was designed to investigate the bacteriology and outcome predictors of SBE in cirrhotic patients.

METHODS

Medical records of cirrhotic patients treated in a tertiary care university hospital from December 2004 to December 2008 were retrospectively reviewed.

RESULTS

Of 3390 cirrhotic patients seen during the study period, 81 cases of SBE were diagnosed. The incidence of SBE was 2.4% (81/3390) in cirrhotic patients and 16% (81/508) in patients with cirrhosis with hydrothorax. There were 46 monomicrobial infections found in 46 SBE patients. Aerobic Gram-negative organisms were the predominant pathogens (n=29, 63%), and Escherichia coli (n=9, 20%) was the most frequently isolated sole pathogen. The mortality rate of SBE was 38% (31/81). Univariate analysis showed that Child-Pugh score, model for end-stage liver disease (MELD)-Na score, concomitant bacteraemia, concomitant spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, initial intensive care unit (ICU) admission and initial antibiotic treatment failure were predictors of poor outcomes. Multivariate regression analysis demonstrated that the independent factors related to a poor outcome were initial ICU admission [odds ratio (OR): 4.318; 95% confidence interval 1CI) 1.09-17.03; P=0.037], MELD-Na score (OR: 1.267; 95% CI 1.08-1.49; P=0.004) and initial antibiotic treatment failure (OR: 13.10; 95% CI 2.60-66.03).

CONCLUSION

Spontaneous bacterial empyema in cirrhotic patients is a high mortality complication. The independent factors related to poor outcome are high MELD-Na score, initial ICU admission and initial antibiotic treatment failure. High MELD-Na score may be a useful mortality predictor of SBE in cirrhotic patients.

The survival benefit of liver transplantation in hepatocellular carcinoma patients

BACKGROUND

There are no studies evaluating the survival benefit of liver transplantation over alternative therapies for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.

METHODS

The short- to mid-term survival benefit (study group=135 aggressively treated patients with hepatocellular carcinoma, 52% beyond Milan criteria at pathology) was calculated by comparing the mortality rates of liver transplantation vs alternative therapies patients. A Markov prediction model was then created to estimate the long-term survival benefit of liver transplantation (gain in life expectancy) over alternative therapies. The long-term survival rates in the liver transplantation group were calculated using the Metroticket website calculator (http://89.96.76.14/metroticket/calculator/).

RESULTS

The short- to mid-term analysis indicated that liver transplantation afforded no significant survival benefit in the group of patients with hepatoma as a whole (hazard ratio=1.229, 95% confidence interval 0.544-2.773, p=.6200). The benefit was concentrated in patients with a poor initial response to alternative therapies (hazard ratio=3.137, 95% confidence interval 1.428-6.891, p=.0044). In the long-term analysis, the gain in life expectancy of liver transplantation vs alternative therapies was 6.115 years (base-case analysis) and the main determinants of gain in life expectancy were the 5-year survival prospects after alternative therapies and the patient's age.

CONCLUSIONS

The survival benefit of liver transplantation for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma is strongly related to the patient's age and the effectiveness of available alternative therapies.

Disparities in organ allocation and access to liver transplantation in the USA

Liver transplantation has become the standard of care for the treatment of chronic liver disease. In 1986, the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) was formed to ensure the just and equitable allocation of donor livers. At the time, UNOS decided to use the Childs-Turcotte-Pugh scoring system to determine the degree of liver disease in potential transplant patients. Unfortunately, it was shown that the Childs-Turcotte-Pugh system was easily manipulated and did not provide equal access to donor organs. Owing to this fact, the Model of End Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score was instituted by UNOS in February 2002. While the institution of MELD has shown an improvement in organ allocation and outcomes, disparities still exist. This article discusses UNOS and the MELD allocation system as well as the racial, geographic and gender disparities that occur despite the institution of the MELD system.

Response to therapy as a criterion for awarding priority to patients with hepatocellular carcinoma awaiting liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

How to prioritize patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) for liver transplantation (LT) remains controversial. This study was designed to assess the effectiveness of a policy for prioritizing HCC patients according to their response to pre-LT therapy.

METHODS

The study period was from 2000 to 2008. Dropout criteria included macroscopic vascular invasion, metastases, and poorly differentiated grade at pre-LT biopsy. A specific treatment algorithm was adopted to treat HCC before LT, and the effect of treatment was evaluated 3 months after listing or after the diagnosis of HCC for patients diagnosed while already on the waiting list. Patients were divided into two groups: group 1, patients with disease that completely or partially responded to therapy; and group 2, patients with stable, progressive, or untreatable disease. Group 2 patients were prioritized for LT unless full restaging and repeat biopsy identified dropout criteria.

RESULTS

At the 3-month visit, 62 HCC patients (42%) were assigned to group 2 and 85 (58%) to group 1. Eleven of 12 dropouts due to tumor progression came from group 2 (P < 0.01). Response to therapy was the sole predictor of dropout probability, independent of tumor stage (competing risk analysis). The 42 patients in group 2 who were transplanted had much the same 3-year post-LT survival rate as the 57 transplanted patients in group 1 (with survival rates of 82% and 83%, respectively; P > 0.05), but a slightly higher risk of post-LT HCC recurrence (13% and 2%, respectively; P = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

Response to therapy is a potentially effective tool for prioritizing HCC patients for LT.

Health-related quality of life and survival in liver transplant candidates

Health-related quality of life (HRQOL) is an important measure of the effects of chronic liver disease in affected patients that helps guide interventions to improve well-being. However, the relationship between HRQOL and survival in liver transplant candidates remains unclear. We examined whether the Physical Component Summary (PCS) and Mental Component Summary (MCS) scores from the Short Form 36 (SF-36) Health Survey were associated with survival in liver transplant candidates. We administered the SF-36 questionnaire (version 2.0) to patients in the Pulmonary Vascular Complications of Liver Disease study, a multicenter prospective cohort of patients evaluated for liver transplantation in 7 academic centers in the United States between 2003 and 2006. Cox proportional hazards models were used with death as the primary outcome and adjustment for liver transplantation as a time-varying covariate. The mean age of the 252 participants was 54 +/- 10 years, 64% were male, and 94% were white. During the 422 person years of follow-up, 147 patients (58%) were listed, 75 patients (30%) underwent transplantation, 49 patients (19%) died, and 3 patients were lost to follow-up. Lower baseline PCS scores were associated with an increased mortality rate despite adjustments for age, gender, Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score, and liver transplantation (P for the trend = 0.0001). The MCS score was not associated with mortality (P for the trend = 0.53). In conclusion, PCS significantly predicts survival in liver transplant candidates, and interventions directed toward improving the physical status may be helpful in improving outcomes in liver transplant candidates.

Use of sorafenib in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma before liver transplantation: a cost-benefit analysis while awaiting data on sorafenib safety

The role of bridging therapies for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) on the waiting list for liver transplantation (LT) remains controversial. There is strong evidence to support the effectiveness of sorafenib in extending the time to progression of HCC. Using a Markov model, we compared two strategies: one using sorafenib as neoadjuvant therapy before LT (Strategy A), and the other using no bridging therapy in the first 6 months (Strategy B). Reference case: T2 HCC patient with compensated cirrhosis. The benefit of sorafenib in delaying time to HCC progression was expressed as the hazard ratio (HR) and taken from recently published randomized trials. The endpoints considered were: survival benefit measured in quality-adjusted life days (QALDs), transplant probability, costs (C) in euro, willingness to pay (WTP), and net health benefit (NHB), where NHB = survival benefit - C/WTP. The calculated WTP of sorafenib in Italy was 346 euro per QALD. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed a median survival benefit of 94 QALDs (10% percentile = 38, 90% percentile = 210). In the base-case scenario (HR = 0.47, monthly dropout probability = 5%, median time to LT = 3 months), the gain in LT probability due to sorafenib was 5% and it increased proportionally with increasing median times to LT and decreasing HR. In the cost-benefit analysis, the incremental NHB of Strategy A versus Strategy B was 37 QALDs; it increased as sorafenib HR decreased and when median times to LT were shorter than 6 months, whereas for longer times it gradually dropped, particularly when Strategy B included effective locoregional treatments.

CONCLUSION

Sorafenib neoadjuvant therapy is cost-effective by comparison with no therapy for T2-HCC patients waiting for LT, particularly for median times to LT under 6 months.

Liver transplantation: from Child to MELD

The widespread availability of transplantation in most major medical centers in the United States, together with a growing number of transplant candidates, has made it necessary for primary care providers, especially internal medicine and family practice physicians to be active in the clinical care of these patients before and after transplantation. This review provides an overview of the liver transplantation process, including indications, contraindications, time of referral to a transplant center, the current organ allocation system, and briefly touches on the expanding field of living donor liver transplantation.

Values of end-stage liver disease model in assessment of prognosis in patients with decompensated liver cirrhosis

AIM: To compare the prognostic values of for end-stage liver disease (MELD) model and Child-Turcotte-Pugh (CTP) for patients with decompensated liver cirrhosis.

METHODS: From a previously collected database, 203 patients with decompensated liver cirrhosis admitted to our hospital were studied and followed up at least for one year. MELD and CTP score and classification were calculated on entry. Receiver operating characteristics curves (ROC) and the area under ROC were used to determine the ability of the scores for predicting three, six and twelve month mortality. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis (K-M) was performed using the cut-offs to establish the predictive power of each score.

RESULTS: There were 23, 39 and 85 dead cases within 3, 6 and 12 mo respectively. There was a significant correlation between the MELD and CTP score in 3, 6 and 12 mo (r = 0.76, 0.69, 0.71, P < 0.01). The areas under the receiver operating characteristics curves of MELD and CTP for the occurrence of death in 3 mo were 0.886 and 0.775. There was a significant difference in the 3 mo between two scores (P < 0.01). The areas under the receiver operating characteristics curves for MELD was 0.892 compared with 0.876 for CTP at 6 mo (P > 0.05); the area was 0.873 and 0.886 respectively at 12 mo (P > 0.05). Both MELD and CTP scores predicted the death rate and survival rate within 3, 6 and 12 mo by survival analysis (P < 0.01).

CONCLUSION: MELD is a strong prognosis predictor for the decompensated liver cirrhosis. MELD was significantly better than CTP score for predicting in-hospital mortality in 3 mo. However, these are not superior to CTP score and CTP classification in 6 and 12 mo.

22 Levertransplantatie

In 1963 verrichtte Thomas Starzl in Denver de eerste levertransplantatie bij de mens. In 1966 werden in Nederland de eerste twee (auxiliaire, zie par. 22.3.6) levertransplantaties verricht in Leiden en Arnhem, in 1968 startte Cambridge. Helaas resulteerden de eerste levertransplantaties niet in langetermijnoverleving als gevolg van niet-optimale operatietechniek, matige immuunsuppressie en onbekendheid met complicaties.

In-hospital mortality in spontaneous bacterial peritonitis: a new predictive model

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE

Spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP) is a severe complication in cirrhotics with ascites. Early identification of high-risk patients is crucial for prognostic improvement. Model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) relies on a few objective variables and predicts short-term survival. We aimed to determine the predictive value of MELD score, at admission, in the short-term mortality of SBP patients.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study of 73 SBP episodes admitted in our department between January 2002 and April 2006. Diagnosis (neutrophil count in ascitic fluid >or=250/mm3) was established within 24 h and cefotaxime was immediately started. Data collected included age, sex, etiology of liver disease, severity of ascites and hepatic encephalopathy, serum creatinine, total bilirubin and albumin, prothrombin time with international normalized ratio, and ascitic fluid analysis.

STATISTICS

Student's t-test, chi2 test, univariate analysis, logistic regression model, and receiver operating characteristic curves.

RESULTS

In-hospital mortality rate was 37%. In multivariate analysis, MELD score (P<0.001), and advanced age (P<0.05) were independent predictors of mortality. Receiver operating characteristic curve for MELD score revealed an excellent discriminatory ability to predict death, with an area under curve of 0.84. Age increased the predictive ability of MELD score, represented by an increment of area under curve to 0.88.

CONCLUSION

MELD score and older age were independent predictors of mortality. Age increased the discriminatory ability of MELD score to predict death. This new model may be useful for stratifying patients in future therapeutic trials, deserving further validation.

Inequities of the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease: an examination of current components and future additions

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The aim of this article is to examine the limitations of the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) components and summarize data on promising new predictor variables.

RECENT FINDINGS

Promising modifications to MELD have been aimed at identifying more accurate measurements of the current MELD components and at improving survival prediction in earlier stages of cirrhosis. Incorporation of new measurements of cholestasis, coagulopathy and renal dysfunction should improve accuracy and reliability of MELD in predicting mortality in end stage liver disease. Direct bilirubin may be a more specific surrogate marker of liver disease than total bilirubin and further investigation of its use in liver mortality risk models in warranted. The recently developed liver-specific international normalized ratio may mitigate thromboplastin-related variation in international normalized ratio measurements. The incorporation of more accurate assessments of renal function into MELD should improve prognostic accuracy and would avert systematic biases associated with serum creatinine. Hepatic venous pressure gradient and serum sodium are promising predictors of liver-related mortality that may warrant further consideration.

SUMMARY

Modification to MELD, particularly if intended for use in liver transplant allocation, should be based upon objective, reliable, reproducible and readily available predictors; and be able to withstand rigorous model development and validation.

Role and support for hepatologists at liver transplant programs in the United States

Liver transplantation has evolved into a successful option for patients with end-stage liver disease. Transplant hepatologists are involved in the management of patients with end-stage liver disease both before and after liver transplantation. The goals of this study were to evaluate the roles that transplant hepatologists play at liver transplantation programs in the United States and the demand for and institutional support provided for these physicians. A web-based questionnaire was sent via e-mail to the medical directors of all 108 United Network for Organ Sharing-recognized liver transplant programs during the fall of 2006. Follow-up e-mails were sent and phone calls were made to those not completing the survey within 4 weeks. The survey was completed by 72 (67%) medical directors. The average number of liver transplants performed per center was 62, and a broad range of program sizes were represented. The number of transplant hepatologists increased in proportion to the number of transplants performed on an annual basis but lagged behind the number of surgeons and transplant coordinators. On average, 33 liver transplants were performed per year per transplant hepatologist. Transplant hepatologists were involved in all aspects of pretransplant and posttransplant care at all but 10% of these institutions; they provided virtually all pretransplant care at all of these programs and all long-term posttransplant care at 45% of these programs. Overall, 94% of liver transplant programs provided direct salary support and/or ancillary personnel for their transplant hepatologists. Despite this, over half of transplant hepatologists and 75% of those that received no direct salary support performed endoscopic procedures on a regular basis. Eighty-one percent of programs were recruiting additional transplant hepatologists. In conclusion, although the vast majority of transplant hepatologists receive institutional support, this support appears to be inadequate. The current shortage of transplant hepatologists is likely to increase if appropriate support mechanisms are not implemented.

Impact of geographic location on access to liver transplantation among ethnic minorities

BACKGROUND

Recent reports have documented ethnic disparity in access to health care. This disparity appears to exist in organ transplantation and the contributing factors include lack of insurance as well as poor socioeconomic status. The role of geographic location and ethnic composition on accessibility to liver transplantation (LT) is unclear. Therefore, the aim of this study was to determine ethnic transplantation trends based on United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) regions.

METHODS

Using the UNOS database, we identified all adults (> or =18 years) that received LT between 2000 and 2005. We excluded multiorgan transplants and living donor transplantation. The data collected included ethnicity, transplantation rate, and UNOS region. Data were analyzed using the chi test.

RESULTS

A total of 30,311 patients received a LT during the study period. Of these, 22,673 (74.8%) were white, 3621 (12%) were Hispanic, 2490 (8.2%) were African Americans, and the rest of other ethnic groups (5%). Liver transplantation based on ethnicity was region specific, with the lowest for African Americans in region 6 (2.7%), for Hispanics in region 11 (2.2%), and for whites in region 5 (57.6%), respectively. There was no consistent correlation between the ethnicity of the recipients and the ethnic composition of the geographic location (region).

CONCLUSION

Significant variations in access to liver transplantation for ethnic minorities exist across geographic lines. Understanding the interaction between ethnic minorities with end-stage liver disease in a geographic location and a transplant center will be invaluable as a first step in identifying the key nonmedical factors that play a role in this disparity.