Authors' Response: The Riskiest Job in Medicine: Transplant Surgeons and Organ Procurement Travel

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/78645/1/j.1600-6143.2010.03015.x.pd

5 Years After Tragedy: An Update on Organ Procurement Travel in Michigan

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/100335/1/ajt12399.pd

Going the distance for procurement of donation after circulatory death livers for transplantation—Does reimbursement reflect reality?

Donation after circulatory death (DCD) liver transplantation (LT) has increased slowly over the past decade. Given that transplant surgeons generally determine liver offer acceptance, understanding surgeon incentives and disincentives is paramount. The purpose of this study was to assess aggregate travel distance per successful DCD versus deceased after brain death (DBD) liver procurement as a surrogate for surgeon time expenditure and opportunity cost. All consecutive liver offers made to Michigan Medicine from 2006 to 2017 were analyzed. Primary outcome was the summative travel distance (spent on all attempted procurements) per successful liver procurement that resulted in LT. Donation after circulatory death liver offer acceptance was lower than DBD liver offers, as was proportion of successful procurements among accepted offers. Overall, 10 275 miles were travelled for accepted DCD liver offers, resulting in 23 successful procurements (mean 447 miles per successful DCD liver procurement). For accepted DBD liver offers, 197 299 miles were travelled, resulting in 863 successful procurements (mean 229 miles per successful DBD liver procurement). On average, each successful DCD liver procurement required 218 more miles of travel than each successful DBD liver procurement. Current reimbursement policies poorly reflect increased surgeon travel (and time) expenditures between DCD and DBD liver offers.Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/154400/1/ctr13780_am.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/154400/2/ctr13780.pd

Improving Organ Procurement Travel Practices in the United States: Proceedings from the Michigan Donor Travel Forum

There are significant risks and inefficiencies associated with organ procurement travel. In an effort to identify, quantify, and define opportunities to mitigate these risks and inefficiencies, 25 experts from the transplantation, transportation and insurance fields were convened. The forum concluded that: on procurement travel practices are inadequate, there is wide variation in the quality of aero-medical transportation, current travel practices for organ procurement are inefficient and there is a lack of standards for organ procurement travel liability coverage. The forum concluded that the transplant community should require that air-craft vendors adhere to industry quality standards compatible with the degree of risk in their mission profiles. Within this context, a purchasing collaborative within the transplant community may offer opportunities for improved service and safety with lower costs. In addition, changes in travel practices should be considered with broader sharing of procurement duties across centers. Finally, best practice standards should be instituted for life insurance for transplant personnel and liability insurance for providers. Overall, the aims of these proposals are to raise procurement travel standards and in doing so, to improve the transplantation as a whole.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/79257/1/j.1600-6143.2009.02964.x.pd

Clinical and Economic Outcomes of Rabbit Antithymocyte Globulin Induction in Adults Who Received Kidney Transplants from Living Unrelated Donors and Received Cyclosporine‐Based Immunosuppression

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/90167/1/phco.29.10.1166.pd

Recovery and Utilization of Deceased Donor Kidneys from Small Pediatric Donors

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/72146/1/j.1600-6143.2006.01353.x.pd

Addition of adult-to-adult living donation to liver transplant programs improves survival but at an increased cost

Using outcomes data from the Adult-to-Adult Living Donor Liver Transplantation Cohort Study, we performed a cost-effectiveness analysis exploring the costs and benefits of living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). A multistage Markov decision analysis model was developed with treatment, including medical management only (strategy 1), waiting list with possible deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT; strategy 2), and waiting list with possible LDLT or DDLT (strategy 3) over 10 years. Decompensated cirrhosis with medical management offered survival of 2.0 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) while costing an average of $65,068, waiting list with possible DDLT offered 4.4-QALY survival and a mean cost of$151,613, and waiting list with possible DDLT or LDLT offered 4.9-QALY survival and a mean cost of $208,149. Strategy 2 had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of$35,976 over strategy 1, whereas strategy 3 produced an ICER of $106,788 over strategy 2. On average, strategy 3 cost$47,693 more per QALY than strategy 1. Both DDLT and LDLT were cost-effective compared to medical management of cirrhosis over our 10-year study period. The addition of LDLT to a standard waiting list DDLT program is effective at improving recipient survival and preventing waiting list deaths but at a greater cost. Liver Transpl 15:148–162, 2009. © 2009 AASLD.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/61905/1/21671_ftp.pd

Clinical yield of diagnostic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in orthotopic liver transplant recipients With suspected biliary complications

Diagnostic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (D‐ERCP) is commonly performed for the evaluation of biliary complications after orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT). This practice is contrary to the national trend of reserving endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for therapeutic purposes. Our aim was to evaluate the clinical yield and complications of D‐ERCP in OLT recipients. In this retrospective study, 165 OLT recipients who underwent ERCP between January 2006 and December 2010 at the University of Michigan were divided into 2 groups: (1) a therapeutic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (T‐ERCP) group (if they met prespecified criteria that suggested a high likelihood of endoscopic intervention) and (2) a D‐ERCP group (if there was clinical suspicion of biliary disease but they did not meet any criteria). The 2 groups were compared with respect to the proportion of subjects undergoing high‐yield ERCP, which was defined as a procedure resulting in a clinically important intervention that modified the disease course. 66.3% of the D‐ERCP procedures were classified as high‐yield, whereas 90.1% of the T‐ERCP procedures were ( P < 0.001). Serious complications were infrequent in both groups. A survey of practitioners caring for OLT recipients suggested that the rate of high‐yield D‐ERCP seen in this study is congruent with what is considered acceptable in clinical practice. In conclusion, although T‐ERCP is more likely to reveal a pathological process requiring an intervention, D‐ERCP appears to be an acceptable clinical strategy for OLT recipients because of the high likelihood of a high‐yield study and the low rate of serious complications. Liver Transpl, 2012. © 2012 AASLD.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/95170/1/23535_ftp.pd

PROviding Better ACcess To ORgans: A comprehensive overview of organ‐access initiatives from the ASTS PROACTOR Task Force

Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/138905/1/ajt14441_am.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/138905/2/ajt14441.pd

The impact of intraoperative fluid management during laparoscopic donor nephrectomy on donor and recipient outcomes

BackgroundIntraoperative fluid management during laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN) may have a significant effect on donor and recipient outcomes. We sought to quantify variability in fluid management and investigate its impact on donor and recipient outcomes.MethodsA retrospective review of patients who underwent LDN from July 2011 to January 2016 with paired kidney recipients at a single center was performed. Patients were divided into tertiles of intraoperative fluid management (standard, high, and aggressive). Donor and recipient demographics, intraoperative data, and postoperative outcomes were analyzed.ResultsOverall, 413 paired kidney donors and recipients were identified. Intraoperative fluid management (mL/h) was highly variable with no correlation to donor weight (kg) (R = 0.017). The aggressive fluid management group had significantly lower recipient creatinine levels on postoperative day 1. However, no significant differences were noted in creatinine levels out to 6 months between groups. No significant differences were noted in recipient postoperative complications, graft loss, and death. There was a significant increase (P < 0.01) in the number of total donor complications in the aggressive fluid management group.ConclusionsAggressive fluid management during LDN does not improve recipient outcomes and may worsen donor outcomes compared to standard fluid management.Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/149691/1/ctr13542_am.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/149691/2/ctr13542.pd