Outcomes of living liver donor candidate evaluations in the Living Donor Collective pilot registry

the Living Donor Collective participants

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Background: To gather information on long-term outcomes after living donation, the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) conducted a pilot on the feasibility of establishing a comprehensive donor candidate registry. Methods: A convenience sample of 6 US living liver donor programs evaluated 398 consecutive donor candidates in 2018, ending with the March 12, 2020, COVID-19 emergency. Results: For 333/398 (83.7%), the donor or program decided whether to donate; 166/333 (49.8%) were approved, and 167/333 (50.2%) were not or opted out. Approval rates varied by program, from 27.0% to 63.3% (median, 46%; intraquartile range, 37.3–51.1%). Of those approved, 90.4% were white, 57.2% were women, 83.1% were < 50 years, and 85.5% had more than a high school education. Of 167 candidates, 131 (78.4%) were not approved or opted out because of: medical risk (10.7%); chronic liver disease risk (11.5%); psychosocial reasons (5.3%); candidate declined (6.1%); anatomical reasons increasing recipient risk (26.0%); recipient-related reasons (33.6%); finances (1.5%); or other (5.3%). Conclusions: A comprehensive national registry is feasible and necessary to better understand candidate selection and long-term outcomes. As a result, the US Health Resources and Services Administration asked SRTR to expand the pilot to include all US living donor programs.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalClinical Transplantation
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - 2021

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Keywords

  • decision making
  • liver failure
  • liver transplantation
  • risk assessment
  • scientific registry of transplant recipients

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Outcomes of living liver donor candidate evaluations in the Living Donor Collective pilot registry'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this