Search

Multidisciplinary hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) treatment is associated with optimal outcomes. There are few data analyzing the impact of treating hospitals' therapeutic offerings on survival. We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients aged 18-70 years with HCC in the National Cancer Database (2004-2012). Hospitals were categorized based on the level of treatment offered (Type I-nonsurgical; Type II-ablation; Type III-resection; Type IV-transplant). Associations between overall risk of death and hospital type were evaluated with multivariable Cox shared frailty modeling. Among 50,381 patients, 65% received care in Type IV hospitals, 26% in Type III, 3% in Type II, and 6% in Type I. Overall 5-year survival across modalities was highest at Type IV hospitals (untreated: Type IV-13.1% versus Type I-5.7%, Type II-7.0%, Type III-7.4% [log-rank, P < 0.001]; chemotherapy and/or radiation: Type IV-18.1% versus Type I-3.6%, Type II-4.6%, Type III-7.7% [log-rank, P < 0.001]; ablation: Type IV-33.3% versus Type II-13.6%, Type III-23.6% [log-rank, P < 0.001]; resection: Type IV-48.4% versus Type III-39.1% [log-rank, P < 0.001]). Risk of death demonstrated a dose-response relationship with the hospital type-Type I (ref); Type II (hazard ratio [HR] 0.81, 95% confidence interval [0.73-0.90]); Type III (HR 0.67 [0.62-0.72]); Type IV hospitals (HR 0.43 [0.39-0.47]). Conclusion: Although care at hospitals offering the full complement of HCC treatments is associated with decreased risk of death, one third of patients are not treated at these hospitals. These data can inform the value of health policy initiatives regarding regionalization of HCC care., (© 2018 by the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases.)

Implications of prescription opioid use for outcomes after liver transplantation (LT) have not been described. We integrated national transplant registry data with records from a large pharmaceutical claims clearinghouse (2008-2014; n = 29,673). Opioid fills on the waiting list were normalized to morphine equivalents (MEs), and exposure was categorized as follows: > 0-2 ME/day (level 1), > 2-10 ME/day (level 2), > 10-70 ME/day (level 3), and >70 ME/day (level 4). Associations (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 95% LCL aHR 95% UCL ) of pretransplant ME level with patient and graft survival over 5 years after transplant were quantified by multivariate Cox regression including adjustment for recipient, donor, and transplant factors, as well as propensity adjustment for opioid use. Overall, 9.3% of recipients filled opioids on the waiting list. Compared with no use, level 3 (aHR 1.06 1.28 1.55 ) and 4 (aHR 1.16 1.52 1.98 ) opioid use during listing were associated with increased mortality over 5 years after transplant. These associations were driven by risk after the first transplant anniversary, such that mortality >1-5 years increased in a graded manner with higher use on the waiting list (level 2, aHR, 1.00 1.27 1.62 ; level 3, aHR, 1.08 1.38 1.77 ; level 4, aHR, 1.49 2.01 2.72 ). Similar patterns occurred for graft failure. Of recipients with the highest level of opioids on the waiting list, 65% had level 3 or 4 use in the first year after transplant, including 55% with use at these levels from day 90-365 after transplant. Opioid use in the first year after transplant also bore graded associations with subsequent death and graft loss >1-5 years after transplant. Opioid use history may be relevant in assessing and providing care to LT candidates. Liver Transplantation 23 305-314 2017 AASLD., (© 2016 by the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases.)

Despite improved overall liver transplant outcomes, biliary complications remain a significant cause of morbidity. A national data set linking transplant registry and Medicare claims data for 17,012 liver transplant recipients was used to identify all recipients with a posttransplant biliary diagnosis code within the first 6 months after transplantation. Patients were further categorized as follows: a diagnosis without a procedure, a diagnosis and an associated radiological or endoscopic procedure, or a diagnosis treated with surgery. Overall, 15.0% had a biliary diagnosis, 11.2% required a procedure, and 2.2% had a surgical revision. Factors independently associated with biliary complications included donation after cardiac death (DCD), donor age, recipient age, split grafts, and long cold ischemia times. Graft loss was significantly more common for patients with biliary diagnoses [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) = 1.89, confidence interval (CI) = 1.63-2.19], interventions (aHR = 2.08, CI = 1.77-2.44), and surgical procedures (aHR = 1.80, CI = 1.31-2.49). Mortality after transplantation was also markedly increased for patients with biliary diagnoses (aHR = 2.18, CI = 1.97-2.40), procedures (aHR = 2.21, CI = 1.99-2.46), and surgeries (aHR = 1.77, CI = 1.41-2.23). In stratified analyses, the impact of early biliary complications was greater for DCD liver recipients, but they remained highly significant for recipients of allografts from brain-dead donors as well. Reducing biliary complications should improve posttransplant survival and reduce graft loss., (© 2014 American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases.)

Accurate assessment of the impact of donor quality on liver transplant (LT) costs has been limited by the lack of a large, multicenter study of detailed clinical and economic data. A novel, retrospective database linking information from the University HealthSystem Consortium and the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network registry was analyzed using multivariate regression to determine the relationship between donor quality (assessed through the Donor Risk Index [DRI]), recipient illness severity, and total inpatient costs (transplant and all readmissions) for 1 year following LT. Cost data were available for 9059 LT recipients. Increasing MELD score, higher DRI, simultaneous liver-kidney transplant, female sex, and prior liver transplant were associated with increasing cost of LT (P < 0.05). MELD and DRI interact to synergistically increase the cost of LT (P < 0.05). Donors in the highest DRI quartile added close to $12,000 to the cost of transplantation and nearly $22,000 to posttransplant costs in comparison to the lowest risk donors. Among the individual components of the DRI, donation after cardiac death (increased costs by $20,769 versus brain dead donors) had the greatest impact on transplant costs. Overall, 1-year costs were increased in older donors, minority donors, nationally shared organs, and those with cold ischemic times of 7-13 hours (P < 0.05 for all). In conclusion, donor quality, as measured by the DRI, is an independent predictor of LT costs in the perioperative and postoperative periods. Centers in highly competitive regions that perform transplantation on higher MELD patients with high DRI livers may be particularly affected by the synergistic impact of these factors., (Copyright © 2011 American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases.)

We examined the relationship between the total cost incurred by liver transplantation (LT) recipients and their Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score at the time of transplant. We used a novel database linking billing claims from a large private payer with the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network registry. Included were adults who underwent LT from March 2002 through August 2007 (n = 990). Claims within the year preceding and following transplantation were analyzed according to the recipient's calculated MELD score. Cost was the primary endpoint and was assessed by the length of stay and charges. Transplant admission charges represented approximately 50% of the total cost of LT. MELD was a significant cost driver for pretransplant, transplant, and total charges. A MELD score of 28 to 40 was associated with additional charges of $349,213 (P < 0.05) in comparison with a score of 15 to 20. Pretransplant and transplant admission charges were higher by $152,819 (P < 0.05) and $64,286 (P < 0.05), respectively, in this higher MELD group. No differences by MELD score were found for posttransplant charges. Those in the highest MELD group also experienced longer hospital stays both in the pretransplant period and at the time of LT but did not have higher rates of re-admissions. In conclusion, high-MELD patients incur significantly higher costs prior to and at the time of LT. Following LT, the MELD score is not a significant predictor of cost or re-admission., (Copyright 2009 AASLD)