The effect of Share 35 on biliary complications: An interrupted time series analysis

The purpose of the Share 35 allocation policy was to improve liver transplant waitlist mortality, targeting high MELD waitlisted patients. However, policy changes may also have unintended consequences that must be balanced with the primary desired outcome. We performed an interrupted time series assessing the impact of Share 35 on biliary complications in a select national liver transplant population using the Vizient CDB/RM database. Liver transplants that occurred between October 2012 and September 2015 were included. There was a significant change in the incident‐rate of biliary complications between Pre‐Share 35 (n = 3018) and Post‐Share 35 (n = 9984) cohorts over time (P = .023, r2 = .44). As a control, a subanalysis was performed throughout the same time period in Region 9 transplant centers, where a broad sharing agreement had previously been implemented. In the subanalysis, there was no change in the incident‐rate of biliary complications between the two time periods. Length of stay and mean direct cost demonstrated a change after implementation of Share 35, although they did not meet statistical difference. While the target of improved waitlist mortality is of utmost importance for the equitable allocation of organs, unintended consequences of policy changes should be studied for a full assessment of a policy's impact.

[1]  S. Groshen,et al.  Improvement in the Outcomes of MELD ≥ 40 Liver Transplantation: An Analysis of 207 Consecutive Transplants in a Highly Competitive DSA , 2017, Transplantation.

[2]  D. Goldberg,et al.  Same policy, different impact: Center‐level effects of share 35 liver allocation , 2017, Liver transplantation : official publication of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases and the International Liver Transplantation Society.

[3]  R. Gilroy,et al.  Share 35 changes in center‐level liver acceptance practices , 2017, Liver transplantation : official publication of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases and the International Liver Transplantation Society.

[4]  D. Segev,et al.  Waitlist Outcomes of Liver Transplant Candidates Who Were Reprioritized Under Share 35 , 2017, American journal of transplantation : official journal of the American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons.

[5]  S. Halpern,et al.  Liver transplant center variability in accepting organ offers and its impact on patient survival. , 2016, Journal of hepatology.

[6]  R. Hirose,et al.  The impact of broader regional sharing of livers: 2‐year results of “Share 35” , 2016, Liver transplantation : official publication of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases and the International Liver Transplantation Society.

[7]  B. Samstein,et al.  One Size Does Not Fit All—Regional Variation in the Impact of the Share 35 Liver Allocation Policy , 2016, American journal of transplantation : official journal of the American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons.

[8]  M. Levy,et al.  Financial Impact of Liver Sharing and Organ Procurement Organizations' Experience With Share 35: Implications for National Broader Sharing , 2016, American journal of transplantation : official journal of the American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons.

[9]  D. Segev,et al.  Early Changes in Liver Distribution Following Implementation of Share 35 , 2015, American journal of transplantation : official journal of the American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons.

[10]  M. Fouad,et al.  The Impact of Proposed Changes in Liver Allocation Policy on Cold Ischemia Times and Organ Transportation Costs , 2015, American journal of transplantation : official journal of the American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons.

[11]  M. Schnitzler,et al.  Variation in Biliary Complication Rates Following Liver Transplantation: Implications for Cost and Outcome , 2015, American journal of transplantation : official journal of the American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons.

[12]  M. Schnitzler,et al.  National assessment of early biliary complications following liver transplantation: Incidence and outcomes , 2014, Liver transplantation : official publication of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases and the International Liver Transplantation Society.

[13]  Kara E MacLeod,et al.  The interaction among donor characteristics, severity of liver disease, and the cost of liver transplantation , 2011, Liver transplantation : official publication of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases and the International Liver Transplantation Society.

[14]  J. Markmann,et al.  Geographic Inequity in Access to Livers for Transplantation , 2010, Transplantation.

[15]  M. Schnitzler,et al.  The Economic Impact of the Utilization of Liver Allografts with High Donor Risk Index , 2007, American journal of transplantation : official journal of the American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons.

[16]  T. Welling,et al.  Who Pays for Biliary Complications Following Liver Transplant? A Business Case for Quality Improvement , 2006, American journal of transplantation : official journal of the American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons.

[17]  G. McNatt,et al.  The Economic Impact of MELD on Liver Transplant Centers , 2005, American journal of transplantation : official journal of the American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons.

[18]  M. Saadeh,et al.  Liver , 2016, Laboratory Investigation.