WorldCat Identities

Taner, C. Burcin

Overview
Works: 3 works in 5 publications in 1 language and 161 library holdings
Roles: Editor, htt
Publication Timeline
.
Most widely held works by C. Burcin Taner
Donation after circulatory death (DCD) liver transplantation : a practical guide( )

3 editions published in 2020 in English and held by 158 WorldCat member libraries worldwide

This book presents the first comprehensive review of all facets of liver transplantation using DCD donors. Each of the 19 chapters are written by leading experts in the field, representing some of the most experienced DCD liver transplant programs in the world. Several topics have overlapping coverage in different chapters, providing the reader with the perspective of multiple experts on crucial topics. Chapters also highlight the steps towards building a DCD liver transplant program, the importance of donor and recipient selection, as well as state-of-the-art developments and future directions in the utilization of these organs. Donation after Circulatory Death (DCD) Liver Transplantation serves as a valuable resource for all those involved in liver transplantation using DCD donors
What are the outcomes of declining a public health service increased risk liver donor for patients on the liver transplant waiting list?( )

1 edition published in 2018 in English and held by 1 WorldCat member library worldwide

Abstract : The tragedy of the national opioid epidemic has resulted in a significant increase in the number of opioid-related deaths and accordingly an increase in the number of potential donors designated Public Health Service (PHS) increased risk. Previous studies have demonstrated reluctance to use these PHS organs, and as a result, higher discard rates for these organs have been observed. All patients listed for liver transplantation in the United States from January 2005 to December 2016 were investigated. Patients on the waiting list were divided into 2 groups: those in which a PHS liver was used for transplantation (accepted PHS group) and those in which a PHS liver was declined and transplanted into a recipient lower on the match run (declined PHS group). Intention-to-treat patient survival from the time of PHS offer was significantly higher in the accepted PHS compared with the declined PHS group (P <0.001). On Cox multivariate regression, declining a PHS donor liver was associated with a hazard ratio of 2.36 (95% confidence interval, 2.23-2.49; P <0.001). For patients in which a PHS organ offer was declined, 11.6% died or were delisted for being too sick within the subsequent year. Donor liver allografts implanted in the accepted PHS group were of a lower donor risk index (1.28 versus 1.44) compared with the non-PHS organs that patients in the declined PHS group ultimately received if they underwent transplantation. In conclusion, there is a significantly higher survival for patients in which a PHS liver is accepted and used compared with those patients in which a PHS organ is declined. These data will help inform decisions about whether or not to accept a PHS donor liver for both patients and transplant professionals. Liver Transplantation 24 497-504 2018 AASLD
Intraregional model for end-stage liver disease score variation in liver transplantation: Disparity in our own backyard( )

1 edition published in 2018 in English and held by 1 WorldCat member library worldwide

Abstract : Variation in average Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score at liver transplantation (LT) by United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) regions is well documented. The present study aimed to investigate MELD variation at the interregional, intraregional, and intra-donation service area (DSA) levels. Patients undergoing LT between 2015 and 2016 were obtained from the UNOS standard analysis and research file. The distribution of allocation MELD score including median, skew, and kurtosis was examined for all transplant programs. Intraregional median allocation MELD varied significantly within all 11 UNOS regions. The largest variation between programs was seen in region 5 (MELD 24.0 versus 38.5) and region 3 (MELD 20.5 versus 32.0). Regions 1, 5, and 9 had the largest proportion of programs with a highly negative skewed MELD score (50%, 57%, and 57%, respectively), whereas regions 3, 6, 10, and 11 did not have any programs with a highly negative skew. MELD score distribution was also examined in programs located in the same DSA, where no barriers exist and theoretically no significant difference in allocation should be observed. The largest DSA variation in median allocation MELD score was seen in NYRT-OP1 LiveOnNY (MELD score variation 11), AZOB-OP1 Donor Network of Arizona (MELD score variation 11), MAOB-OP1 New England Organ Bank (MELD score variation 9), and TXGC-OP1 LifeGift Organ Donation Ctr (MELD score variation 9). In conclusion, the present study demonstrates that this MELD disparity is not only present at the interregional level but can be seen within regions and even within DSAs between programs located as close as several city blocks away. Although organ availability likely accounts for a component of this disparity, the present study suggests that transplant center behavior may also play a significant role. Liver Transplantation 24 488-496 2018 AASLD
 
Audience Level
0
Audience Level
1
  Kids General Special  
Audience level: 0.55 (from 0.55 for Donation a ... to 0.88 for Donation a ...)

Languages