{"title":"Psychosocial Determinants and Outcomes of Expedited Liver Transplant Evaluations: Insights From a Retrospective Cohort Analysis.","authors":"Katherine M Cooper, Padmavathi Srivoleti, Alessandro Colletta, Doris Tripp, Savant Mehta, Babak Movahedi, Deepika Devuni","doi":"10.1097/TXD.0000000000001745","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>As the burden of chronic liver disease and the demand for liver transplants (LT) grows, understanding the interplay between access to care and patient outcomes is increasingly important. In this study, we explored patient characteristics and transplant outcomes in patients undergoing LT evaluations, with a focus on identifying risk factors for expedited LT evaluation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This single-center retrospective cohort study included patients who underwent LT evaluation for deceased donor LT between October 2017 and July 2021. Patients were categorized by context: expedited (inpatient) and routine (outpatient) LT evaluation groups. The outcome measures included waitlist status, pre-LT mortality, and post-LT complications.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 602 patients, 26% underwent expedited LT evaluation. Patients who underwent expedited evaluation were more likely to have a history of ascites (<i>P</i> < 0.001), hepatic encephalopathy (<i>P</i> < 0.001), and spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (<i>P</i> < 0.001) and had a higher model for end-stage liver disease sodium scores (<i>P</i> < 0.001). Both mortality (35% versus 17%, <i>P</i> < 0.001) and LT (39% versus 22%, <i>P</i> < 0.001) were more common in the expedited group; post-LT mortality was similar up to 2 y. Perceived financial concerns and social security disability income were risk factors for expedited LT evaluation. In addition, greater proximity to the LT center (95% confidence interval, 1.1-6.3; <i>P</i> = 0.025) and speaking a primary language other than English (95% confidence interval, 1.0-10.7; <i>P</i> = 0.042) were risk factors for expedited LT evaluation in women but not in men.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Expedited LT evaluations were associated with more severe illness and higher pre-LT mortality; however, post-LT outcomes were comparable with those of routine evaluations. Identifying psychosocial risk factors may enhance equity and access to LT evaluations, particularly for women who face unique challenges in this context.</p>","PeriodicalId":23225,"journal":{"name":"Transplantation Direct","volume":"11 2","pages":"e1745"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11781761/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transplantation Direct","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/TXD.0000000000001745","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"TRANSPLANTATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: As the burden of chronic liver disease and the demand for liver transplants (LT) grows, understanding the interplay between access to care and patient outcomes is increasingly important. In this study, we explored patient characteristics and transplant outcomes in patients undergoing LT evaluations, with a focus on identifying risk factors for expedited LT evaluation.
Methods: This single-center retrospective cohort study included patients who underwent LT evaluation for deceased donor LT between October 2017 and July 2021. Patients were categorized by context: expedited (inpatient) and routine (outpatient) LT evaluation groups. The outcome measures included waitlist status, pre-LT mortality, and post-LT complications.
Results: Of 602 patients, 26% underwent expedited LT evaluation. Patients who underwent expedited evaluation were more likely to have a history of ascites (P < 0.001), hepatic encephalopathy (P < 0.001), and spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (P < 0.001) and had a higher model for end-stage liver disease sodium scores (P < 0.001). Both mortality (35% versus 17%, P < 0.001) and LT (39% versus 22%, P < 0.001) were more common in the expedited group; post-LT mortality was similar up to 2 y. Perceived financial concerns and social security disability income were risk factors for expedited LT evaluation. In addition, greater proximity to the LT center (95% confidence interval, 1.1-6.3; P = 0.025) and speaking a primary language other than English (95% confidence interval, 1.0-10.7; P = 0.042) were risk factors for expedited LT evaluation in women but not in men.
Conclusions: Expedited LT evaluations were associated with more severe illness and higher pre-LT mortality; however, post-LT outcomes were comparable with those of routine evaluations. Identifying psychosocial risk factors may enhance equity and access to LT evaluations, particularly for women who face unique challenges in this context.