Effect of ABO-Incompatible Listing on Infant Heart Transplant Waitlist Outcomes: Analysis of the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) Database

Everitt, Melanie D.; Donaldson, Amy; Casper, T. Charles; Stehlik, Josef; Hawkins, John A.; Tani, Lloyd Y.; Renlund, Dale G.; Kouretas, Peter C.; Kaza, Aditya K.; Bullock, Emily A.; Cardon, Michelle; Kfoury, Abdallah G.

doi:10.1016/j.healun.2009.06.024

Cited by 32 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…One study indicated that infants eligible for ABOi hearts have a median waiting time of 2 weeks less than those only listed for ABOc hearts. 47 Another analysis showed a reduction in median waiting time (72 days for ABOc-listed patients compared with 54 days for ABOilisted patients). 49…”

Section: Implementation: Effects On Waiting List Mortality and Time Tmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…46 ABOi cardiac transplants therefore remain infrequent in the USA-analysis of the UNOS database to 2008 showed that Ͻ25% of eligible infant recipients received an ABOi organ and, not surprisingly, the wait-list mortality is unchanged. 47,48 Recent data has confirmed that ABOi listing is associated with a higher likelihood of transplantation at 30 days and that, in the USA, listing for ABOi transplantation is still preferentially used for sicker patients but with equivalent outcomes to ABOc transplants. 49,50 There have been recent calls for changing the UNOS allocation system to one that gives less preference to ABO compatibility.…”

Section: Implementation: Effects On Waiting List Mortality and Time Tmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…49,50 There have been recent calls for changing the UNOS allocation system to one that gives less preference to ABO compatibility. 47,51,52 Data from the USA showed that there is a difference in listing times between children listed for ABOc and ABOi transplants. One study indicated that infants eligible for ABOi hearts have a median waiting time of 2 weeks less than those only listed for ABOc hearts.…”

Section: Implementation: Effects On Waiting List Mortality and Time Tmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…6,37,40,47,53 There appears to be no difference in longer term survival, nor an increased incidence of cardiac allograft vasculopathy, post-transplant lymphoproliferative disease (PTLD) or renal dysfunction. 35,48 A recent multicenter study using the Pediatric Heart Transplant Study (PHTS) database analyzed 85 ABOi cardiac transplants.…”

Section: Clinical Outcomes After Abo-incompatible Transplantationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Pushing the boundaries: The current status of ABO-incompatible cardiac transplantation

Irving

Gennery

Kirk

2012

The Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Implementation: Effects On Waiting List Mortality and Time Tmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Implementation: Effects On Waiting List Mortality and Time Tmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Implementation: Effects On Waiting List Mortality and Time Tmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Clinical Outcomes After Abo-incompatible Transplantationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Pushing the boundaries: The current status of ABO-incompatible cardiac transplantation

Irving

Gennery

Kirk

2012

The Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…For Status 2 candidates within a specified geographic zone, ABO identical received priority over ABO compatible. Consequently, waiting times for blood group O candidates increased substantially (25,26); hearts were allocated to infants aged <1 year listed for ABO-I heart transplant only if no ABO compatible candidate nationwide accepted the donor heart. Current heart allocation policies Current heart allocation policy reflects an effort to prioritize hearts to the sickest heart transplant candidates on the waiting list, while taking into account technological advances that have changed the clinical profile and prognosis.…”

Section: Blood Group Considerationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lung and Heart Allocation in the United States

Colvin-Adams

Valapour

Hertz

et al. 2012

American Journal of Transplantation

119

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Lung and heart allocation in the United States has evolved over the past 20-30 years to better serve transplant candidates and improve organ utilization. The current lung allocation policy, based on the Lung Allocation Score, attempts to take into account risk of death on the waiting list and chance of survival posttransplant. This policy is flexible and can be adjusted to improve the predictive ability of the score. Similarly, in response to the changing clinical phenotype of heart transplant candidates, heart allocation policies have evolved to a multitiered algorithm that attempts to prioritize organs to the most infirm, a designation that fluctuates with trends in therapy. The Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network and its committees have been responsive, as demonstrated by recent modifications to pediatric heart allocation and mechanical circulatory support policies and by ongoing efforts to ensure that heart allocation policies are equitable and current. Here we examine the development of US lung and heart allocation policy, evaluate the application of the current policy on clinical practice and explore future directions for lung and heart allocation.

show abstract