[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
Views 127
Citations 0
Comment & Response
October 2016

Resolving Misconceptions About Liver Allocation and Redistricting Methodology

Author Affiliations
  • 1Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
  • 2Department of Mathematics, US Naval Academy, Annapolis, Maryland
  • 3Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients, Minneapolis Medical Research Foundation, Minneapolis, Minnesota
  • 4Department of Surgery, University of California, San Francisco
  • 5Department of Surgery, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut
JAMA Surg. 2016;151(10):991-992. doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2016.1315

To the Editor In their Viewpoint,1 Ladner and Mehrotra criticize the methods used to develop a redistricting solution to geographic inequity in the allocation of deceased donor livers for transplant, and the ability of clinicians on the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) Liver Committee to evaluate conceptualized changes to allocation. Their Viewpoint1 contains inaccuracies about the current allocation model and the redistricting concept.

First Page Preview View Large
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview