The Evolution of the National Liver Review Board

The Effect of Acuity Circles on Deceased Donor Transplant and Offer Rates Across Model for End-Stage Liver Disease Scores and Exception Statuses

Acuity circles (AC), the new liver allocation system, was implemented on February 4, 2020. Difference-in-differences analyses estimated the effect of AC on adjusted deceased donor transplant and offer rates across Pediatric End-Stage Liver Disease (PELD) and Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) categories and types of exception statuses. The offer rates were the number of first offers, top 5 offers, and top 10 offers on the match run per person-year. Each analysis adjusted for candidate characteristics and only used active candidate time on the waiting list. The before-AC period was February 4, 2019, to February 3, 2020, and the after-AC period was February 4, 2020, to February 3, 2021. Candidates with PELD/MELD scores 29 to 32 and PELD/MELD scores 33 to 36 had higher transplant rates than candidates with PELD/MELD scores 15 to 28 after AC compared with before AC (transplant rate ratios: PELD/MELD scores 29-32, _2.34 3.32_4.71 ; PELD/MELD scores 33-36, _1.70 2.51_3.71 ). Candidates with PELD/MELD scores 29 or higher had higher offer rates than candidates with PELD/MELD scores 15 to 28, and candidates with PELD/MELD scores 29 to 32 had the largest difference (offer rate ratios [ORR]: first offers, _2.77 3.95_5.63 ; top 5 offers, _3.90 4.39_4.95 ; top 10 offers, _4.85 5.30_5.80 ). Candidates with exceptions had lower offer rates than candidates without exceptions for offers in the top 5 (ORR: hepatocellular carcinoma [HCC], _0.68 0.77_0.88 ; non-HCC, _0.73 0.81_0.89 ) and top 10 (ORR: HCC, _0.59 0.65_0.71 ; non-HCC, _0.69 0.75_0.81 ). Recipients with PELD/MELD scores 15 to 28 and an HCC exception received a larger proportion of donation after circulatory death (DCD) donors after AC than before AC, although the differences in the liver donor risk index were comparatively small. Thus, candidates with PELD/MELD scores 29 to 34 and no exceptions had better access to transplant after AC, and donor quality did not notably change beyond the proportion of DCD donors.

Basic principles of liver allocation and development over the years

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Prior to the enactment of the National Organ Transplant Act in 1984, there was no organized system to allocate donor organs in the United States. The process of liver allocation has come a long way since then, including the development and implementation of the Model for End-stage Liver Disease, which is an objective estimate of risk of mortality among candidates awaiting liver transplantation.

RECENT FINDINGS

The Liver Transplant Community is constantly working to optimize the distribution and allocation of scare organs, which is essential to promote equitable access to a life-saving procedure in the setting of clinical advances in the treatment of liver disease. Over the past 17 years, many changes have been made. Most recently, liver distribution changed such that deceased donor livers will be distributed based on units established by geographic circles around a donor hospital rather than the current policy, which uses donor service areas as the unit of distribution. In addition, a National Liver Review Board was created to standardize the process of determining liver transplant priority for candidates with exceptional medical conditions. The aim of these changes is to allocate and distribute organs in an efficient and equitable fashion.

SUMMARY

The current review provides a historical perspective of liver allocation and the changing landscape in the United States.