Geographic variation in utilization of deceased donor livers in the United States in the era of advanced perfusion

Understanding the geographic variation in deceased donor liver utilization can guide allocation policy and technology implementation. Using US transplant registry data, we evaluated geographic differences in utilization by donor quality, policy era, and uptake of advanced perfusion (AP). This retrospective cohort included all liver donors and waitlisted patients from 2010 to September 2024. Donors were aggregated by Hospital Referral Region (HRR) and stratified by quality using the liver Discard Risk Index (DSRI). Exposures included the allocation policy era and increased use of AP technology (July 2022 onward). Observed-to-expected (O:E) ratios of liver non-utilization were calculated by HRR and modeled to reveal geographically contiguous low utilization clusters (LUCs). The proportion of HRRs within LUCs increased from 24% in Share 15 (S15), to 25% in Share 35 (S35), 32% in Acuity Circles (AC), and then decreased to 21% in the AP era ( p =0.01). There were 7 distinct LUCs in S15 (median non-utilization=33%), 7 LUCs in S35 (non-utilization=32%), 7 LUCs in AC (non-utilization=41%), and 3 LUCs in the AP era (non-utilization=46%). Donor quality by HRR decreased over time, with a median DSRI of 2.56 (IQR: 1.25-5.79) in S15 to 5.69 (2.01-35.30) in AP ( p <0.001). Accounting for DSRI, odds of non-utilization were highest in AC ( ref. Share 35 , OR=1.27, p <0.001), which decreased in AP (OR=1.06, p =0.001). Utilization of normothermic machine perfusion was associated with a markedly lower odds of discard (OR=0.03, 0.03-0.04; p <0.001). Livers originating from LUCs traveled shorter distances in each era other than S35. The number of net exporter HRRs in LUCs was equivalent to non-LUCs in each era, other than AP, where LUCs contained fewer net exporter HRRs [2 (3.2%) vs. 42 (17.4%), p =0.004]. On adjusted analysis, candidates in LUCs had a lower likelihood of transplant (HR=0.88, p <0.001) but also lower waitlist mortality (HR=0.95, p <0.001). The advent of advanced perfusion was associated with the utilization of otherwise marginal liver allografts and ameliorating geographic imbalances in discard seen with successive allocation policy eras.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Liver Transplantation
Published
2025-07-14
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1097/lvt.0000000000000687
Citations
4
Primary Topic
Organ Transplantation Techniques and Outcomes
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
8.03
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Geographic variation in utilization of deceased donor livers in the United States in the era of advanced perfusion

Muhammad Umaid Rabbani, Robert M. Cannon, David Goldberg, Saulat S. Sheikh et al.
4 citations
Liver Transplantation
Organ Transplantation Techniques and Outcomes
8.03
article

Geographic variation in utilization of deceased donor livers in the United States in the era of advanced perfusion

Muhammad Umaid Rabbani, Robert M. Cannon, David Goldberg, Saulat S. Sheikh, Marcos E. Pozo, Sergio A. Acuña, Paul A. MacLennan, Maggie E. Jones, Juliet Emamaullee, M. Chandler McLeod, Hiren Dayala
article en
4 citations

Abstract

Understanding the geographic variation in deceased donor liver utilization can guide allocation policy and technology implementation. Using US transplant registry data, we evaluated geographic differences in utilization by donor quality, policy era, and uptake of advanced perfusion (AP). This retrospective cohort included all liver donors and waitlisted patients from 2010 to September 2024. Donors were aggregated by Hospital Referral Region (HRR) and stratified by quality using the liver Discard Risk Index (DSRI). Exposures included the allocation policy era and increased use of AP technology (July 2022 onward). Observed-to-expected (O:E) ratios of liver non-utilization were calculated by HRR and modeled to reveal geographically contiguous low utilization clusters (LUCs). The proportion of HRRs within LUCs increased from 24% in Share 15 (S15), to 25% in Share 35 (S35), 32% in Acuity Circles (AC), and then decreased to 21% in the AP era ( p =0.01). There were 7 distinct LUCs in S15 (median non-utilization=33%), 7 LUCs in S35 (non-utilization=32%), 7 LUCs in AC (non-utilization=41%), and 3 LUCs in the AP era (non-utilization=46%). Donor quality by HRR decreased over time, with a median DSRI of 2.56 (IQR: 1.25-5.79) in S15 to 5.69 (2.01-35.30) in AP ( p <0.001). Accounting for DSRI, odds of non-utilization were highest in AC ( ref. Share 35 , OR=1.27, p <0.001), which decreased in AP (OR=1.06, p =0.001). Utilization of normothermic machine perfusion was associated with a markedly lower odds of discard (OR=0.03, 0.03-0.04; p <0.001). Livers originating from LUCs traveled shorter distances in each era other than S35. The number of net exporter HRRs in LUCs was equivalent to non-LUCs in each era, other than AP, where LUCs contained fewer net exporter HRRs [2 (3.2%) vs. 42 (17.4%), p =0.004]. On adjusted analysis, candidates in LUCs had a lower likelihood of transplant (HR=0.88, p <0.001) but also lower waitlist mortality (HR=0.95, p <0.001). The advent of advanced perfusion was associated with the utilization of otherwise marginal liver allografts and ameliorating geographic imbalances in discard seen with successive allocation policy eras.

Liver TransplantationVol. 32(1)
University of Southern California (US), University of Miami (US), University of Alabama at Birmingham (US)
Partnerships for the goals
Openalex Percentile: Top 2%
Organ Transplantation Techniques and Outcomes
8.03
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.