Show simple item record

Broader Geographic Sharing of Pediatric Donor Lungs Improves Pediatric Access to Transplant

dc.contributor.authorTsuang, W. M.
dc.contributor.authorChan, K. M.
dc.contributor.authorSkeans, M. A.
dc.contributor.authorPyke, J.
dc.contributor.authorHertz, M. I.
dc.contributor.authorIsrani, A. J.
dc.contributor.authorRobbins‐callahan, L.
dc.contributor.authorVisner, G.
dc.contributor.authorWang, X.
dc.contributor.authorWozniak, T. C.
dc.contributor.authorValapour, M.
dc.date.accessioned2016-10-17T21:20:11Z
dc.date.available2017-05-02T15:09:14Zen
dc.date.issued2016-03
dc.identifier.citationTsuang, W. M.; Chan, K. M.; Skeans, M. A.; Pyke, J.; Hertz, M. I.; Israni, A. J.; Robbins‐callahan, L. ; Visner, G.; Wang, X.; Wozniak, T. C.; Valapour, M. (2016). "Broader Geographic Sharing of Pediatric Donor Lungs Improves Pediatric Access to Transplant." American Journal of Transplantation (3): 930-937.
dc.identifier.issn1600-6135
dc.identifier.issn1600-6143
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/134263
dc.description.abstractUS pediatric transplant candidates have limited access to lung transplant due to the small number of donors within current geographic boundaries, leading to assertions that the current lung allocation system does not adequately serve pediatric patients. We hypothesized that broader geographic sharing of pediatric (adolescent, 12â 17 years; child, <12 years) donor lungs would increase pediatric candidate access to transplant. We used the thoracic simulated allocation model to simulate broader geographic sharing. Simulation 1 used current allocation rules. Simulation 2 offered adolescent donor lungs across a wider geographic area to adolescents. Simulation 3 offered child donor lungs across a wider geographic area to adolescents. Simulation 4 combined simulations 2 and 3. Simulation 5 prioritized adolescent donor lungs to children across a wider geographic area. Simulation 4 resulted in 461 adolescent transplants per 100 patientâ years on the waiting list (range 417â 542), compared with 206 (range 180â 228) under current rules. Simulation 5 resulted in 388 adolescent transplants per 100 patientâ years on the waiting list (range 348â 418) and likely increased transplant rates for children. Adult transplant rates, waitlist mortality, and 1â year posttransplant mortality were not adversely affected. Broader geographic sharing of pediatric donor lungs may increase pediatric candidate access to lung transplant.This study addresses the problem of US pediatric transplant candidatesâ limited access to lung transplants and shows that broader geographic sharing of pediatric donor lungs can increase pediatric transplant rates without adversely impacting adult patients.
dc.publisherWiley Periodicals, Inc.
dc.subject.otherScientific Registry for Transplant Recipients (SRTR)
dc.subject.otherdonors
dc.subject.otherhealth services and outcomes research
dc.subject.otherlung transplantation
dc.subject.otherpulmonology
dc.subject.otherdonation
dc.titleBroader Geographic Sharing of Pediatric Donor Lungs Improves Pediatric Access to Transplant
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.rights.robotsIndexNoFollow
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelMedicine (General)
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelHealth Sciences
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Reviewed
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/134263/1/ajt13507_am.pdf
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/134263/2/ajt13507.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/ajt.13507
dc.identifier.sourceAmerican Journal of Transplantation
dc.identifier.citedreferenceScientific Registry of Transplant Recipients. Centers performing adult lung transplants in 2011, within Donation Service Areas. 2015 [cited 2015 Jul 27]. Available from: http://www.srtr.org/maps/files/2011/LU_8_1.pdf.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSnyder JJ, Salkowski N, Skeans M, et al. The equitable allocation of deceased donor lungs for transplant in children in the United States. Am J Transplant 2014; 14: 178 â 183.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceValapour M, Skeans MA, Heubner BM, et al. OPTN/SRTR 2013 Annual Data Report: Lung. Am J Transplant 2015; 15(Suppl 2): 1 â 28.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLadin K, Hanto DW. Rationing lung transplantsâ Procedural fairness in allocation and appeals. N Engl J Med 2013; 369: 599 â 601.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceEgan TM, Sweet SC. Rationing lung transplants. N Engl J Med 2013; 369: 2064 â 2065.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSweet SC, Barr ML. Pediatric lung allocation: The rest of the story. Am J Transplant 2014; 14: 11 â 12.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHalpern SD. Beyond â the LAS is broken.â Ways to improve lung allocation. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2015; 191: 245 â 246.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAdolescent Classification Exception Briefing Paper June. 2014 [cited 2015 Jul 27]. Available from: http://optn.transplant.hrsa.gov/converge/CommitteeReports/board_main_ThoracicOrganTransplantationCommittee_7_3_2014_10_58.pdf.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLeppke S, Leighton T, Zaun D, et al. Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients: Collecting, analyzing, and reporting data on transplantation in the United States. Transplant Rev (Orlando) 2013; 27: 50 â 56.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceThompson D, Waisanen L, Wolfe R, Merion RM, McCullough K, Rodgers A. Simulating the allocation of organs for transplantation. Health Care Manag Sci 2004; 7: 331 â 338.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFreeman RB, Harper AM, Edwards EB. Redrawing organ distribution boundaries: Results of a computerâ simulated analysis for liver transplantation. Liver Transpl 2002; 8: 659 â 666.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKim SP, Gupta D, Israni AK, Kasiske BL. Accept/decline decision module for the liver simulated allocation model. Health Care Manag Sci 2015; 18: 35 â 57.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMeyer DM, Rogers JG, Edwards LB, et al. The future direction of the adult heart allocation system in the United States. Am J Transplant 2015; 15: 44 â 54.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceIsrani AK, Salkowski N, Gustafson S, et al. New national allocation policy for deceased donor kidneys in the United States and possible effect on patient outcomes. J Am Soc Nephrol 2014; 25: 1842 â 1848.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceColvinâ Adams M, Valapour M, Hertz M, et al. Lung and heart allocation in the United States. Am J Transplant 2012; 12: 3213 â 3234.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceEgan TM, Murray S, Bustami RT, et al. Development of the new lung allocation system in the United States. Am J Transplant 2006; 6: 1212 â 1227.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSweet SC. Pediatric lung transplantation. Proc Am Thorac Soc 2009; 6: 122 â 127.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSweet SC. Update on pediatric lung allocation in the United States. Pediatr Transplant 2009; 13: 808 â 813.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceValapour M, Skeans MA, Heubner BM, et al. OPTN/SRTR 2012 Annual Data Report: Lung. Am J Transplant 2014; 14(Suppl 1): 139 â 165.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceU.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN). Ethical principles of pediatric organ allocation. 2015 [cited 2015 Jul 27]. Available from: http://optn.transplant.hrsa.gov/resources/ethics/ethicalâ principlesâ ofâ pediatricâ organâ allocation/.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGottlieb J, Greer M, Sommerwerck U, et al. Introduction of the lung allocation score in Germany. Am J Transplant 2014; 14: 1318 â 1327.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLamas D, Rosenbaum L. Very complicated mathâ Reconfiguring organ allocation. N Engl J Med 2014; 371: 2447 â 2450.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceUbel PA. Transplantation trafficâ Geography as destiny for transplant candidates. N Engl J Med 2014; 371: 2450 â 2452.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRusso MJ, Meltzer D, Merlo A, et al. Local allocation of lung donors results in transplanting lungs in lower priority transplant recipients. Ann Thorac Surg 2013; 95: 1231 â 1234.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceOrgan Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN). OPTN Policy: 10.2.B Lung Candidates with Exceptional Cases. 2015 [cited 2015 Jul 27]. Available from: http://optn.transplant.hrsa.gov/ContentDocuments/OPTN_Policies.pdf#nameddest=Policy_10.
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.