Unintended consequences are inherent in any organ allocation system. In this issue of JAMA Surgery, DuBay et al1 illustrate how the new deceased donor kidney transplant distribution change, using 250–nautical mile circles from the donor hospital as the first level of allocation, may decrease deceased donor transplant opportunities in areas of the US with a higher population burden of end-stage kidney disease (ESKD). They use the total population of patients with ESKD, with a sensitivity analysis including those younger than 70 years as a measure of transplant candidacy potential, and demonstrate that this new allocation policy widens the disparity of transplants relative to a state’s ESKD burden in many instances. They highlight the increased availability of kidney transplantation in the New York City donor service area (DSA) compared with the state of Nevada under their metric.
Identify all potential conflicts of interest that might be relevant to your comment.
Conflicts of interest comprise financial interests, activities, and relationships within the past 3 years including but not limited to employment, affiliation, grants or funding, consultancies, honoraria or payment, speaker's bureaus, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, royalties, donation of medical equipment, or patents planned, pending, or issued.
Err on the side of full disclosure.
If you have no conflicts of interest, check "No potential conflicts of interest" in the box below. The information will be posted with your response.
Not all submitted comments are published. Please see our commenting policy for details.
Andreoni KA. Allocating/Rationing Organs for Transplant: Filling More Life Rafts vs Rearranging the Deck Chairs. JAMA Surg. 2021;156(7):646. doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2021.1496
Coronavirus Resource Center
Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.