Recipient ineligibility after liver transplantation assessment: A single centre experience

17Citations
Citations of this article
22Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Background: Candidacy for liver transplantation is determined through standardized evaluation. There are limited data on the frequency and reasons for denial of transplantation after assessment; analysis may shed light on the short-term utility of the assessment. We sought to describe the frequency and reasons for ineligibility for liver transplantation among referred adults. Methods: We studied all prospectively followed recipient candidates at a single centre who were deemed unsuitable for liver transplantation after assessment. Inclusion criteria were age 18 years and older and completion of a standard liver transplantation evaluation over a 3-year period. Patients were excluded if they had a history of prior assessment or liver transplantation within the study period. Demographic and baseline clinical data and reasons for recipient ineligibility were recorded. Results: In all, 337 patients underwent their first liver transplantation evaluation during the study period; 166 (49.3%) fulfilled inclusion criteria. The mean age was 55.4 years, and 106 (63.9%) were men. The 3 most common reasons for denial of listing were patient too well (n = 82, 49.4%), medical comorbidities and/or need for medical optimization (n = 43, 25.9%) and need for addiction rehabilitation (n = 28, 16.9%). Conclusion: Ineligibility for transplantation after assessment was common, occurring in nearly half of the cohort. Most denied candidates could be identified with more discriminate screening before the resource-intensive assessment; however, the assessment likely provides unforeseen positive impacts on patient care. © 2013 Canadian Medical Association.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Arya, A., Hernandez-Alejandro, R., Marotta, P., Uhanova, J., & Chandok, N. (2013). Recipient ineligibility after liver transplantation assessment: A single centre experience. Canadian Journal of Surgery, 56(3). https://doi.org/10.1503/cjs.004512

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free