Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35921119›Full record

ArticleJAMA surgery2022

Survival Benefit of Living-Donor Liver Transplant.

Whitney E Jackson, John S Malamon, Bruce Kaplan, Jessica L Saben, Jesse D Schold, James J Pomposelli, Elizabeth A Pomfret

2 registry-linked trialsAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 55 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
55citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT06875232 enrolling by invitationnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

The Correlation Between CT and MRCP Pre-LDLT for Liver Blood Vessel Assessment: an Ambidirectional Cohort Study

Typeobservational_patient_registrySponsorErasmus Medical CenterRan2026 to 2027Enrolled90ConditionsLiving Donor Liver TransplantationArmsLiving liver donors
NCT07015723 enrolling by invitationnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

The Correlation Between MRCP and Biopsy Pre-LDLT for Liver Steatosis Assessment: an Ambidirectional Cohort Study

Typeobservational_patient_registrySponsorErasmus Medical CenterRan2026 to 2027Enrolled90ConditionsLiving Donor Liver TransplantationArmsLiving liver donors
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

55 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. The survival benefit of deceased donor liver transplantation using MELD 3.0: A contemporary analysis.Liver transplantation : official publication of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases and the International Liver Transplantation Society · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Postoperative outcomes in living donor liver transplantHepatobiliary surgery and nutrition · 2026
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Living donor liver re-transplantation: a viable option?Hepatobiliary surgery and nutrition · 2025
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. American perspectives for LDLT in 2024.Updates in surgery · 2025
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Whitney E JacksonDepartment of Medicine, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora.
John S MalamonColorado Center for Transplantation Care, Research, and Education, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora.
Bruce KaplanDepartment of Medicine, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora.
Jessica L SabenColorado Center for Transplantation Care, Research, and Education, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora.
Jesse D ScholdLerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio.
James J PomposelliColorado Center for Transplantation Care, Research, and Education, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora.
Elizabeth A PomfretColorado Center for Transplantation Care, Research, and Education, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Despite the acceptance of living-donor liver transplant (LDLT) as a lifesaving procedure for end-stage liver disease, it remains underused in the United States. Quantification of lifetime survival benefit and the Model for End-stage Liver Disease incorporating sodium levels (MELD-Na) score range at which benefit outweighs risk in LDLT is necessary to demonstrate its safety and effectiveness. Objective: To assess the survival benefit, life-years saved, and the MELD-Na score at which that survival benefit was obtained for individuals who received an LDLT compared with that for individuals who remained on the wait list. Design, Setting, and Participants: This case-control study was a retrospective, secondary analysis of the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients database of 119 275 US liver transplant candidates and recipients from January 1, 2012, to September 2, 2021. Liver transplant candidates aged 18 years or older who were assigned to the wait list (N = 116 455) or received LDLT (N = 2820) were included. Patients listed for retransplant or multiorgan transplant and those with prior kidney or liver transplants were excluded. Exposures: Living-donor liver transplant vs remaining on the wait list. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome of this study was life-years saved from receiving an LDLT. Secondary outcomes included 1-year relative mortality and risk, time to equal risk, time to equal survival, and the MELD-Na score at which that survival benefit was obtained for individuals who received an LDLT compared with that for individuals who remained on the wait list. MELD-Na score ranges from 6 to 40 and is well correlated with short-term survival. Higher MELD-Na scores (>20) are associated with an increased risk of death. Results: The mean (SD) age of the 119 275 study participants was 55.1 (11.2) years, 63% were male, 0.9% were American Indian or Alaska Native, 4.3% were Asian, 8.2% were Black or African American, 15.8% were Hispanic or Latino, 0.2% were Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, and 70.2% were White. Mortality risk and survival models confirmed a significant survival benefit for patients receiving an LDLT who had a MELD-Na score of 11 or higher (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.47-0.88]; P = .006). Living-donor liver transplant recipients gained an additional 13 to 17 life-years compared with patients who never received an LDLT. Conclusions and Relevance: An LDLT is associated with a substantial survival benefit to patients with end-stage liver disease even at MELD-Na scores as low as 11. The findings of this study suggest that the life-years gained are comparable to or greater than those conferred by any other lifesaving procedure or by a deceased-donor liver transplant. This study's findings challenge current perceptions regarding when LDLT survival benefit occurs.

Indexed as

End Stage Liver DiseaseLiver TransplantationCase-Control StudiesFemaleHumansLiving DonorsMaleRetrospective StudiesSeverity of Illness IndexSodiumUnited StatesSodium

Identifiers

PMID35921119
PMCPMC9350845

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.