ABSTRACT
Recently we validated the donor risk index (DRI) as conducted by Feng et al. for the Eurotransplant region. Although this scoring system is a valid tool for scoring donor liver quality, for allocation purposes a scoring system tailored for the Eurotransplant region may be more appropriate. Objective of our study was to investigate various donor and transplant risk factors and design a risk model for the Eurotransplant region. This study is a database analysis of all 5939 liver transplantations from deceased donors into adult recipients from the 1st of January 2003 until the 31st of December 2007 in Eurotransplant. Data were analyzed with Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression models. From 5723 patients follow-up data were available with a mean of 2.5 years. After multivariate analysis the DRI (p < 0.0001), latest lab GGT (p = 0.005) and rescue allocation (p = 0.007) remained significant. These factors were used to create the Eurotransplant Donor Risk Index (ET-DRI). Concordance-index calculation shows this ET-DRI to have high predictive value for outcome after liver transplantation. Therefore, we advise the use of this ET-DRI for risk indication and possibly for allocation purposes within the Eurotrans-plant region.
Subject(s)
Liver Transplantation , Tissue Donors , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Child , Child, Preschool , Europe , Female , Humans , Infant , Infant, Newborn , Male , Middle Aged , Multivariate Analysis , Young AdultSubject(s)
Graft Survival/physiology , Pancreas Transplantation/mortality , Pancreas Transplantation/physiology , Tissue Donors/statistics & numerical data , ABO Blood-Group System , Adolescent , Adult , Cadaver , Cause of Death , Child , Child, Preschool , Europe , Female , Humans , Kidney Transplantation/mortality , Kidney Transplantation/physiology , Male , Middle Aged , Patient Selection , Survival Analysis , Tissue and Organ Procurement/methods , Young AdultABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Because of the increasing demand for pancreas transplantation, more marginal donors are offered to Eurotransplant. The aim of this study was to validate a donor quality score that would facilitate recognition of a suitable pancreas donor among all reported donors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed all 3180 consecutively reported pancreas donors for the period between January 1, 2002 and June 30, 2005 and determined the influence of the preprocurement pancreas suitability score (P-PASS) on the acceptance of a pancreas. We defined a range and point weight for each variable based on clinical expertise and known literature. RESULTS: Multiple regression analysis using pancreas acceptance as an outcome variable identified P-PASS > or = 17 as a significant cutoff point (P < .001). Pancreata from donors with P-PASS > or = 17 were three times more likely to be refused. CONCLUSION: The donor score can help in screening for potential pancreas donors, where an ideal donor has a P-PASS < 17. Our data demonstrate that consideration of a combination of preprocurement factors can help identify a suitable pancreas donor. Therefore, we recommend that a pancreas donor score be calculated for each potential pancreas donor, and all donors with a P-PASS < 17 should be considered for pancreas donation.