450 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19009713)
1. Impact of the model for end-stage liver disease allocation policy on the use of high-risk organs for liver transplantation.
Volk ML; Lok AS; Pelletier SJ; Ubel PA; Hayward RA
Gastroenterology; 2008 Nov; 135(5):1568-74. PubMed ID: 19009713
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. One Size Does Not Fit All--Regional Variation in the Impact of the Share 35 Liver Allocation Policy.
Halazun KJ; Mathur AK; Rana AA; Massie AB; Mohan S; Patzer RE; Wedd JP; Samstein B; Subramanian RM; Campos BD; Knechtle SJ
Am J Transplant; 2016 Jan; 16(1):137-42. PubMed ID: 26561981
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Survival on waiting list for liver transplantation before and after introduction of the model for end-stage liver disease score.
Tenório AL; Macedo FI; Miranda LE; Fernandes JL; da Silva CM; Neto OL; Lacerda CM
Transplant Proc; 2010 Mar; 42(2):407-11. PubMed ID: 20304152
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. MELD scores of liver transplant recipients according to size of waiting list: impact of organ allocation and patient outcomes.
Trotter JF; Osgood MJ
JAMA; 2004 Apr; 291(15):1871-4. PubMed ID: 15100206
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Improved posttransplant mortality after share 35 for liver transplantation.
Kwong AJ; Goel A; Mannalithara A; Kim WR
Hepatology; 2018 Jan; 67(1):273-281. PubMed ID: 28586179
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Re-weighting the model for end-stage liver disease score components.
Sharma P; Schaubel DE; Sima CS; Merion RM; Lok AS
Gastroenterology; 2008 Nov; 135(5):1575-81. PubMed ID: 18835388
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Impact of Model for End-stage Liver Disease Score-based Allocation System in Korea: A Nationwide Study.
Lee J; Kim DG; Lee JY; Lee JG; Joo DJ; Kim SI; Kim MS
Transplantation; 2019 Dec; 103(12):2515-2522. PubMed ID: 30985735
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Impact of MELD 30-allocation policy on liver transplant outcomes in Italy.
Ravaioli M; Lai Q; Sessa M; Ghinolfi D; Fallani G; Patrono D; Di Sandro S; Avolio A; Odaldi F; Bronzoni J; Tandoi F; De Carlis R; Pascale MM; Mennini G; Germinario G; Rossi M; Agnes S; De Carlis L; Cescon M; Romagnoli R; De Simone P
J Hepatol; 2022 Mar; 76(3):619-627. PubMed ID: 34774638
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score and organ allocation from cadaveric donors for 198 liver transplantation procedures performed in a single center.
Santori G; Andorno E; Morelli N; Casaccia M; Bottino G; Ghirelli R; Valente U
Transplant Proc; 2008; 40(6):1903-5. PubMed ID: 18675084
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Improved waiting-list outcomes in Argentina after the adoption of a model for end-stage liver disease-based liver allocation policy.
Cejas NG; Villamil FG; Lendoire JC; Tagliafichi V; Lopez A; Krogh DH; Soratti CA; Bisigniano L
Liver Transpl; 2013 Jul; 19(7):711-20. PubMed ID: 23775946
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Improvement in the Outcomes of MELD ≥ 40 Liver Transplantation: An Analysis of 207 Consecutive Transplants in a Highly Competitive DSA.
Nekrasov V; Matsuoka L; Kaur N; Pita A; Whang G; Cao S; Groshen S; Alexopoulos S
Transplantation; 2017 Oct; 101(10):2360-2367. PubMed ID: 28319564
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. A comparison of liver transplantation outcomes in the pre- vs. post-MELD eras.
Kanwal F; Dulai GS; Spiegel BM; Yee HF; Gralnek IM
Aliment Pharmacol Ther; 2005 Jan; 21(2):169-77. PubMed ID: 15679767
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Short-term postliver transplant survival after the introduction of MELD scores for organ allocation in the United States.
Yoo HY; Thuluvath PJ
Liver Int; 2005 Jun; 25(3):536-41. PubMed ID: 15910490
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Developments in pediatric liver transplantation since implementation of the new allocation rules in Eurotransplant.
Herden U; Grabhorn E; Briem-Richter A; Ganschow R; Nashan B; Fischer L
Clin Transplant; 2014 Sep; 28(9):1061-8. PubMed ID: 25040668
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Prognostic value of MELD score and donor quality in liver transplantation: implications for the donor recipient match.
Avolio AW; Agnes S; Gasbarrini A; Nure E; Siciliano M; Castagneto M
Transplant Proc; 2006 May; 38(4):1059-62. PubMed ID: 16757263
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Optimizing repeat liver transplant graft utility through strategic matching of donor and recipient characteristics.
Hung K; Gralla J; Dodge JL; Bambha KM; Dirchwolf M; Rosen HR; Biggins SW
Liver Transpl; 2015 Nov; 21(11):1365-73. PubMed ID: 25865434
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. National and regional analysis of exceptions to the Pediatric End-Stage Liver Disease scoring system (2003-2004).
Shneider BL; Suchy FJ; Emre S
Liver Transpl; 2006 Jan; 12(1):40-5. PubMed ID: 16382460
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. The impact of broader regional sharing of livers: 2-year results of "Share 35".
Edwards EB; Harper AM; Hirose R; Mulligan DC
Liver Transpl; 2016 Apr; 22(4):399-409. PubMed ID: 26890858
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) system to allocate and to share livers: experience of two Italian centers.
Ravaioli M; Masetti M; Dazzi A; Romano A; Spaggiari M; Grazi GL; Ercolani G; Cescon M; Di Gioia P; De Ruvo N; Montalti R; Ballarin R; Di Benedetto F; Ridolfi L; Alvaro N; Ramacciato G; Morelli C; Gerunda E; Pinna AD
Transplant Proc; 2008; 40(6):1814-5. PubMed ID: 18675057
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Liver transplantation for hepatocellular cancer: the impact of the MELD allocation policy.
Wiesner RH; Freeman RB; Mulligan DC
Gastroenterology; 2004 Nov; 127(5 Suppl 1):S261-7. PubMed ID: 15508092
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
