Abstract
Organ offers in liver transplantation are high-risk medical decisions with a low certainty of whether a better liver offer will come along before death. We hypothesized that decision support could improve the decision to accept or decline. With data from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients, survival models were constructed for 42,857 waiting-list patients and 28,653 posttransplant patients from 2002 to 2008. Daily covariate-adjusted survival probabilities from these 2 models were combined into a 5-year area under the curve to create an individualized prediction of whether an organ offer should be accepted for a given patient. Among 650,832 organ offers from 2008 to 2013, patient survival was compared by whether the clinical decision was concordant or discordant with model predictions. The acceptance benefit (AB)--the predicted gain or loss of life by accepting a given organ versus waiting for the next organ--ranged from 3 to -22 years (harm) and varied geographically; for example, the average benefit of accepting a donation after cardiac death organ ranged from 0.47 to -0.71 years by donation service area. Among organ offers, even when AB was >1 year, the offer was only accepted 10% of the time. Patient survival from the time of the organ offer was better if the model recommendations and the clinical decision were concordant: for offers with AB > 0, the 3-year survival was 80% if the offer was accepted and 66% if it was declined (P < 0.001). In conclusion, augmenting clinical judgment with decision support may improve patient survival in liver transplantation.