Back to Authors

Wall, Anji E

0000-0002-7359-1337

Mayo Clinic

Division of Abdominal Transplantation, Baylor Simmons Transplant Institute, Dallas, Texas, USA.

Citations 3

Utilization of DCD NRP liver grafts: A multicenter study of opportunities for improvement in organ acceptance
Wall, Anji , Abt, Peter, Brubaker, Aleah L. , Paci, P., Merani, Shaheed , Sellers, Marty , Testa, Giuliano, Croome, Kristopher, Croome, Kristopher P. , Sellers, Marty T. , Brubaker, Aleah , Paci, Philippe , Testa, Giuliano , Croome, Kris P , Wall, Anji E , Abt, Peter L. , Testa, Giuliano

Liver Transplantation | March 25, 2026 | Volume: 32 | Issue: 8 | Pages: 1128-1135

10.1097/lvt.0000000000000865 Get It

Normothermic regional perfusion (NRP) adoption for donation after circulatory death (DCD) liver transplantation in the United States has been growing, but there remains a higher rate of non-utilization of NRP DCD liver grafts as compared with donation after brain death liver grafts. Six transplant centers and 1 organ procurement organization (OPO) with substantial NRP liver procurement experience performed retrospective reviews of all NRP procurement attempts from September 1, 2021, until March 1, 2024, identifying opportunities for utilization. Five of the 6 transplant centers had prospectively collected data on all accepted livers with NRP intent. The transplant center's intention to utilize DCD donors included 329 livers accepted for transplantation before withdrawal, 252 (76.6%) potential donors expired within the hospital timeframe for donation, and 168 (66.7%) livers were transplanted. Fifty-seven opportunities for utilization were identified by transplant centers, plus 11 from the OPO: most were due to exceeding a functional warm ischemic time limit (n=26), other reasons (n=17), and functional assessment (n=16). The lessons learned by centers in this study provide guidance for newer NRP centers and for OPOs in identifying opportunities for utilization of NRP DCD grafts that have historically been declined.
Optimizing liver transplant outcomes for colorectal liver metastases in the United States
Chávez‐Villa, Mariana , Sasaki, Kazunari , Nakayama, Toshihiro , Byrne, Matthew , Jiménez-Soto, Cristina , Ruffolo, Luis I. , Endo, Yutaka , Dokus, M. Katherine , Bekki, Yuki , Qadan, Motaz , Tomiyama, Koji , Roberts, J.P., Byrne, Matthew M , Roberts, John P , Pomfret, Elizabeth , Wall, Anji E , Hernández-Alejandro, Roberto , Wall, Anji

Liver Transplantation | October 14, 2025 | Volume: 32 | Issue: 4 | Pages: 508-517

10.1097/lvt.0000000000000746 Get It

The TransMet trial and Norwegian studies have shown excellent outcomes in highly selected patients undergoing liver transplant (LT) for unresectable colorectal liver metastases (uCRLM). Our aim is to provide an updated analysis of the current state of LT for uCRLM in the United States. Adult patients with a diagnosis of uCRLM listed for LT between December 2017 and March 2025 were identified from the United Network for Organ Sharing database and analyzed. An analysis of living donor LT (LDLT) and deceased donor LT (DDLT) was performed. During this period, 222 patients were listed, and 158 received an LT across 33 centers. Of these, 76 (48.1%) underwent LDLT, and 82 patients (51.9%) underwent DDLT. Of the 82 deceased donors, 56 (68.2%) were out-of-sequence offers. Overall, the 3-year survival and disease-free survival rates were 66.7% and 44.0%, respectively. The 3-year survival for LDLT and DDLT was 74.1% and 57.3% ( p =0.04), respectively. While these results have not yet reached the acceptable threshold established for other LT indications, they have improved and are expected to continue improving after the implementation of prioritization points. Given the potential variability of oncologic selection criteria and graft quality, we call for the standardization of nationally accepted selection criteria for listing patients for LT with uCRLM and for providing early access to high-quality organs. To achieve this, it is imperative to create, update, and maintain national databases that allow for the collection of more granular oncological variables.
Quality measures in pre-liver transplant care by the Practice Metrics Committee of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases
Brahmania, Mayur , Kuo, Alexander , Tapper, Elliot B. , Völk, Michael , Vittorio, Jennifer , Ghabril, Marwan , Morgan, Timothy R. , Kanwal, Fasiha , Parikh, Neehar D. , Mehta, Shivang , Goldberg, David S. , Duarte‐Rojo, Andrés , Paredes, Angelo H. , Sahota, Amandeep , McElroy, Lisa M. , Thomas, Charlie, Aslam, Saima , Ramakrishnan, Sudha , Flynn, Mary M. , Volk, Michael L , Vittorio, Jennifer M , Mehta, Shivang , Winder, Scott , Im, Gene , Goldberg, David , Lai, Jennifer , Duarte-Rojo, Andres , Paredes, Angelo H , Patel, Arpan , Sahota, Amandeep , McElroy, Lisa M , Wall, Anji E , Malinis, Maricar , Aslam, Saima , Simonetto, Douglas A , Ufere, Nneka N , Ramakrishnan, Sudha , Ibrahim, Yasmin , Asrani, Sumeet K , Serper, Marina , Ghabril, Marwan S , Parikh, Neehar D , Kanwal, Fasiha , Martin, Paul B. , Winder, Gerald Scott , Lai, Jennifer C. , Patel, Arpan , Wall, Anji , Simonetto, Douglas A. , Asrani, Sumeet K. , Serper, Marina

Hepatology | March 27, 2024 | Volume: 80 | Issue: 3 | Pages: 742-753

10.1097/hep.0000000000000870 Get It

The liver transplantation (LT) evaluation and waitlisting process is subject to variations in care that can impede quality. The American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD) Practice Metrics Committee (PMC) developed quality measures and patient-reported experience measures along the continuum of pre-LT care to reduce care variation and guide patient-centered care. Following a systematic literature review, candidate pre-LT measures were grouped into 4 phases of care: referral, evaluation and waitlisting, waitlist management, and organ acceptance. A modified Delphi panel with content expertise in hepatology, transplant surgery, psychiatry, transplant infectious disease, palliative care, and social work selected the final set. Candidate patient-reported experience measures spanned domains of cognitive health, emotional health, social well-being, and understanding the LT process. Of the 71 candidate measures, 41 were selected: 9 for referral; 20 for evaluation and waitlisting; 7 for waitlist management; and 5 for organ acceptance. A total of 14 were related to structure, 17 were process measures, and 10 were outcome measures that focused on elements not typically measured in routine care. Among the patient-reported experience measures, candidates of LT rated items from understanding the LT process domain as the most important. The proposed pre-LT measures provide a framework for quality improvement and care standardization among candidates of LT. Select measures apply to various stakeholders such as referring practitioners in the community and LT centers. Clinically meaningful measures that are distinct from those used for regulatory transplant reporting may facilitate local quality improvement initiatives to improve access and quality of care.