The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Survival after liver transplantation in the United States: A disease-specific analysis of the UNOS database
Abstract
Our goal was to describe disease-specific survival and the clinical variables that predict survival in a large national cohort of adult liver transplant recipients. Data on 17,044 adult patients who received an initial orthotopic liver transplant between 1990 and 1996 with follow-up through 1999 was obtained from the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS). Disease-specific Kaplan-Meier survival plots and Cox Proportional Hazards models were estimated, and differences in the clinical characteristics of patients at the time of transplantation by disease were examined. Overall posttransplant survival currently exceeds 85% in the first year and is approaching 75% at 5 years. Unadjusted Kaplan-Meier survival is improved for recipients who are younger, female, and in better clinical condition. Survival is a function of disease and level of illness: cancer, fulminant liver failure, alcoholic liver disease, and the hepatitidies have the poorest prognosis, while primary billiary cirrohsis and sclerosing cholangitis have the best. Recipients who were outpatients before transplantation have longer survival than those transplanted from the hospital or intensive care unit. Although the model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score was designed to predict pretransplant survival, patients with higher MELD scores have poorer posttransplant survival, but the MELD score is less predictive than the specific disease. Differences in disease-specific survival are partially explained by differences in disease severity at the time of transplantation. In conclusion, Disease-specific survival models indicate that there remains tremendous variability in survival as a function of underlying liver disease. However, a significant portion of the difference in survival between diseases arises from differences in clinical characteristics at the time of transplantation. (Liver Transpl 2004;10:886-897.)
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Schuppan, D., & Afdhal, N. H. (2008) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(08)60383-9 · Cited by 2,089
Martin, P., DiMartini, A., Feng, S., Brown, R., & Fallon, M. (2014) · Hepatology · doi:10.1002/hep.26972 · Cited by 1,045
AASLD practice guidelines: Evaluation of the patient for liver transplantation†
Murray, K. F., & Carithers, R. L. (2005) · Hepatology · doi:10.1002/hep.20704 · Cited by 939
Natural history of hepatopulmonary syndrome: Impact of liver transplantation†
Swanson, K. L., Wiesner, R. H., & Krowka, M. J. (2005) · Hepatology · doi:10.1002/hep.20658 · Cited by 462
Hilar cholangiocarcinoma: expert consensus statement
Mansour, J. C., Aloia, T. A., Crane, C. H., Heimbach, J. K., Nagino, M., & Vauthey, J.-N. (2015) · HPB · doi:10.1111/hpb.12450 · Cited by 414
Metadata
- Authors
- Roberts, M. S., Angus, D. C., Bryce, C. L., Valenta, Z., & Weissfeld, L.
- Venue
- Liver Transplantation
- Published
- 2004-07
- Volume
- 10
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 886-897
- ISSN
- 1527-6465 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2061818211
- Cited by
- 383
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 20.90
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Survival after liver transplantation in the United States: A disease-specific analysis of the UNOS database. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/lt.20137
- The paper
- Roberts, M. S., Angus, D. C., Bryce, C. L., Valenta, Z., & Weissfeld, L. (2004). Survival after liver transplantation in the United States: A disease-specific analysis of the UNOS database. Liver Transplantation. https://doi.org/10.1002/lt.20137
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.