ArticleJAMA surgery2024
Liver Transplant Costs and Activity After United Network for Organ Sharing Allocation Policy Changes.
Article in JAMA surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Association between intraoperative hypothermia and total hospitalization cost after liver transplantation: a retrospective cohort study.Perioperative medicine (London, England) · 2026Article
- Strategic leadership and financial governance in liver transplantation: Global insights from the International Liver Transplantation Society Congress 2025.Liver transplantation : official publication of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases and the International Liver Transplantation Society · 2026Article
- Geographic variation in utilization of deceased donor livers in the United States in the era of advanced perfusion.Liver transplantation : official publication of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases and the International Liver Transplantation Society · 2026Article
- Integrated care management model for liver transplantation: a narrative review and single-center implementation experience.Translational gastroenterology and hepatology · 2026Review
- Many Moving Parts: New Transplant Allocation Models Are Associated With Increased Organ Travel and Potential Climate Implications.Clinical transplantation · 2025Article
- Updates on the impact of the new liver allocation policy on national liver transplants.Hepatobiliary surgery and nutrition · 2025Article
- Update on Organ Allocation and Liver Transplantation.Gastroenterology & hepatology · 2025Article
- Assessing the financial and equity implications of the 2020 liver allocation policy change.Hepatobiliary surgery and nutrition · 2025Article
- Living Donor Liver Transplant Programs in the United States Need to Be Carefully Nurtured Amidst Expanding Use of Perfusion Technology.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Association of a Liver Allocation Policy Change With Domestic Travel for Liver Transplantation.Transplantation direct · 2025Article
- New Liver Allocation Policy and National Liver Transplant Volume.JAMA surgery · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
37 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: A new liver allocation policy was implemented by United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) in February 2020 with the stated intent of improving access to liver transplant (LT). There are growing concerns nationally regarding the implications this new system may have on LT costs, as well as access to a chance for LT, which have not been captured at a multicenter level. Objective: To characterize LT volume and cost changes across the US and within specific center groups and demographics after the policy implementation. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study collected and reviewed LT volume from multiple centers across the US and cost data with attention to 8 specific center demographics. Two separate 12-month eras were compared, before and after the new UNOS allocation policy: March 4, 2019, to March 4, 2020, and March 5, 2020, to March 5, 2021. Data analysis was performed from May to December 2022. Main Outcomes and Measures: Center volume, changes in cost. Results: A total of 22 of 68 centers responded comparing 1948 LTs before the policy change and 1837 LTs postpolicy, resulting in a 6% volume decrease. Transplants using local donations after brain death decreased 54% (P < .001) while imported donations after brain death increased 133% (P = .003). Imported fly-outs and dry runs increased 163% (median, 19; range, 1-75, vs 50, range, 2-91; P = .009) and 33% (median, 3; range, 0-16, vs 7, range, 0-24; P = .02). Overall hospital costs increased 10.9% to a total of $46 360 176 (P = .94) for participating centers. There was a 77% fly-out cost increase postpolicy ($10 600 234; P = .03). On subanalysis, centers with decreased LT volume postpolicy observed higher overall hospital costs ($41 720 365; P = .048), and specifically, a 122% cost increase for liver imports ($6 508 480; P = .002). Transplant centers from low-income states showed a significant increase in hospital (12%) and import (94%) costs. Centers serving populations with larger proportions of racial and ethnic minority candidates and specifically Black candidates significantly increased costs by more than 90% for imported livers, fly-outs, and dry runs despite lower LT volume. Similarly, costs increased significantly (>100%) for fly-outs and dry runs in centers from worse-performing health systems. Conclusions and Relevance: Based on this large multicenter effort and contrary to current assumptions, the new liver distribution system appears to place a disproportionate burden on populations of the current LT community who already experience disparities in health care. The continuous allocation policies being promoted by UNOS could make the situation even worse.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.