PeerJ · 2026
Current status and geographic inequities in solid organ and corneal transplantation in Ecuador (2010-2022).
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Romero-Alvarez Daniel, Velasteguí-Peñafiel Erick, Castillo María Esther, Ortiz Felipe, Gutiérrez-Espinoza Héctor, Baroja Isabel, Bastidas-Caldes Carlos
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Organ and tissue transplantation is an essential therapy for end-stage disease. However, in Ecuador, systematic evidence on waiting list dynamics, demographic and clinical patterns, and equity in access remains scarce. The absence of comprehensive analyses has limited the capacity to identify disparities and to inform evidence-based allocation policies.
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to characterize the national transplant waiting list in Ecuador from 2010 to 2022, to assess demographic, clinical, and geographic disparities to provide insights into donor-recipient compatibility and equity in allocation.
STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using data from the Ecuadorian National Institute for Organ and Tissue Donation and Transplantation (INDOT). The dataset included all patients listed for kidney, liver, heart, lung, and corneal transplants between 2010 and 2022. Variables analyzed included age, sex, comorbidities, geographic origin, and mortality while on the waiting list. Descriptive statistics were used to characterize the population and compare trends across organ types.
RESULTS: A total of 6,523 individuals were listed during the study period: 59% for corneal, 35.7% for kidney, 4.9% for liver, 0.3% for heart, and 0.06% for lung transplantation. Men predominated in corneal (72.3%) and heart (72.7%) lists, whereas women predominated in kidney (61%) and liver (57%) lists. Overall mortality while on the waiting list reached 21.3%. Geographic disparities were evident, with most transplant programs concentrated in Quito, Guayaquil, and Cuenca.
CONCLUSIONS: This nationwide study demonstrates persistent inequities in Ecuador's transplant system reflected in geographic concentration, sex-specific trends, and mortality among kidney and liver candidates. Findings highlight the need to expand programs beyond major cities, strengthen donor identification strategies, and integrate clinical, socioeconomic, and genetic factors into allocation policies.
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to characterize the national transplant waiting list in Ecuador from 2010 to 2022, to assess demographic, clinical, and geographic disparities to provide insights into donor-recipient compatibility and equity in allocation.
STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using data from the Ecuadorian National Institute for Organ and Tissue Donation and Transplantation (INDOT). The dataset included all patients listed for kidney, liver, heart, lung, and corneal transplants between 2010 and 2022. Variables analyzed included age, sex, comorbidities, geographic origin, and mortality while on the waiting list. Descriptive statistics were used to characterize the population and compare trends across organ types.
RESULTS: A total of 6,523 individuals were listed during the study period: 59% for corneal, 35.7% for kidney, 4.9% for liver, 0.3% for heart, and 0.06% for lung transplantation. Men predominated in corneal (72.3%) and heart (72.7%) lists, whereas women predominated in kidney (61%) and liver (57%) lists. Overall mortality while on the waiting list reached 21.3%. Geographic disparities were evident, with most transplant programs concentrated in Quito, Guayaquil, and Cuenca.
CONCLUSIONS: This nationwide study demonstrates persistent inequities in Ecuador's transplant system reflected in geographic concentration, sex-specific trends, and mortality among kidney and liver candidates. Findings highlight the need to expand programs beyond major cities, strengthen donor identification strategies, and integrate clinical, socioeconomic, and genetic factors into allocation policies.