Filed under: Steve Jobs
Methodist University Hospital confirms Steve's liver transplant
Late last week, the Wall Street Journal reported that Steve Jobs had a liver transplant in April. As of this morning, however, we still hadn't received confirmation from either Apple or any of the hospitals at which the procedure might have been performed. That's changed. Earlier today, Methodist University Hospital in Memphis released a statement confirming the surgery, with Steve's permission:"I am pleased to confirm today, with the patient's permission, that Steve Jobs received a liver transplant at Methodist University Hospital Transplant Institute in partnership with the University of Tennessee in Memphis ... Our one-year patient and graft survival rates are among the best in the nation and were a dominant reason in Mr. Jobs's choice of transplant centers."
James D. Eason, M.D., Program Director at Methodist University Hospital's Transplant Institute, composed the statement and explained that Steve went through the typical transplant eligibility process; in order to receive a donor liver, he had to be the sickest person on the list when the matching organ became available.
This statement stands in contrast to the theories considered in today's New York Times piece about Steve's surgery, which noted that past preferential treatment for celebrities and wealthy patients has largely been ended but there are still ways in which someone with Jobs's resources could try to game the system. The Memphis transplant center has one of the shortest waiting periods in the US for liver patients.
Let us extend a "Well done" to the medical team and "Speedy recovery" to Steve.
![TUAW [Cafepress]](http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.tuaw.com/media/tuaw-cafepress-promo.png)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
guerro said 10:59PM on 6-23-2009
"Sickest person on the waiting list." Does not bode well.
Reply
Rowdehaj said 4:34PM on 6-24-2009
I thought the same, but then again, seeing as he got the transplant, it might mean that Steve's doctors are confident that he'll live long enough for it to be worth the organ.
Dr. Webster said 11:06PM on 6-23-2009
The first sentence is a bit misleading; what happened last week was the Wall Street Journal's report, not Steve's transplant.
Here's a suggested rewrite:
"While the Wall Street Journal reported late last week that Steve Jobs had a liver transplant two months ago, we still haven't..."
Reply
kris said 9:02AM on 6-24-2009
The first sentence seems just fine to me. It says that the WSJ reported last week that he had the transplant in April. Unless there's been an edit since your reply, I don't see what's misleading about it.
Bill Surkis said 11:56PM on 6-23-2009
I'm a physician and I wanted to add my two cents here. In the past, a patient's status for a liver transplant was determined using the "Childs-Pugh" score. This system could allow for certain subjective symptoms such as severity of ascites (fluid build-up in the abdomen) or encephalopathy (altered mental status from liver failure) to effect where a person was on the list. The fact that these subjective factors were used led to some transplant centers getting their patients to the head of the list ahead of sicker patients.
Due to this, a new system based on the "MELD Score" (Model for End Stage Liver Disease) was created. This system is soley based on objective laboratory findings and involves a complex calculation based on a) INR (how thin your blood is - your liver creates the proteins that allows your blood to clot), b) creatinine - a measure of how your kidneys are working - liver failure can lead to kidney failure; and c) Total Bilirubin - one of the substances the liver normally clears when it is working well but doesn't when it is failing. This score which ranges from 6-40 determines your place on the list.
So, there are basically two scenarios - either Steve was very, very sick - much sicker then anyone would have predicted when he first went out on leave OR he has a less common blood type. If Steve had a less common blood type such as type A or B (O is the most common) this could have led to a situation where there was a liver available in his blood type and there was no one sicker then him with that blood type. This issue can be a double-edged sword as there are also fewer donors from less common blood type groups.
I would say the only way a billionaire could game the system in the US would be to move to a region (organ transplant is handled regionally) where the wait was shorter. There are many excellent transplant centers in California - I just suspect the wait is longer there (or Steve's obsession with privacy came into play). This practice is not unusual or limited to billionaires, though the travel expenses can be very high - he will need to keep going back for follow-ups.
Reply
Just Cause said 12:32AM on 6-24-2009
Please point me to all the other press releases where CEO announce they have health issues! The crowd say, "But Steve Jobs is more important to Apple, than other CEOs are to their companies". I say, then why are other companies paying them 10s of millions (and sometimes multiples of that) of dollars in salary then!!
Reply
Just Cause said 12:33AM on 6-24-2009
Do I sound like I'm getting tired of the subject :-)
Rudy said 1:12AM on 6-24-2009
when did salary ever equate to quality of work?
Taylor said 3:44AM on 6-24-2009
Well, Steve only gets a $1/year salary (plus benefits), but then again, he has been the primary face in marketing for the past 10 years.
Caitlin said 2:02AM on 6-24-2009
It has been interesting in the Memphis tech community dealing with the news of it happening right here at Methodist.
Reply
Haro! said 2:57AM on 6-24-2009
I am not too familiar with the topic but, is it really okay for a hospital to talk about what patients got what procedures and for what reason?
Reply
Haro! said 2:58AM on 6-24-2009
ah I skimmed over the "patients permission" bit. My apologies.
gekokujouseikatu said 3:20AM on 6-24-2009
Personally, I hope that the Wall Street Journal or the two journalists who initially reported on the story get sued into oblivion, and that the hospital attendant who outed the information gets a giant HIPAA smack over the face and then fired.
The initial report mentioned nothing about Steve Jobs giving anyone permission to mentioned anything about this. Furthermore it was during his medical leave, so it is on the whole immaterial.
This sort of private matter shouldn't be discussed. It is disgusting, and the WSJ should be utterly ashamed of themselves.
Reply
Joanna D said 6:43AM on 6-24-2009
Oh come on, the WSJ story was CLEARLY approved and likely instigated by Apple. These things don't just appear on the Friday night of a major product launch sporadically. Apple controls the media, live with it.
JoeB said 7:32AM on 6-24-2009
Ive should of just designed him an iLiver.
Reply
Jon said 10:02AM on 6-24-2009
I may be alone when I say this, and I love my iPhone and MacBook Pro but... Do we really care? Why not write an article next time he sneezes too. He might have a cold!
Get a life people
Reply
Jess Q. said 6:02PM on 6-24-2009
I'd say this is a slightly bigger deal than if he sneezed.
Not to mention, even if you're a Scrooge who only cares about money and business, it would be bad for stocks if something happened to Steve.
Personally, I think he seems like a nice enough guy and I'm aware of his existence from watching various keynotes. That's enough for me to take 5 minutes out of my day to care about his health. He's a human being, after all.
colouroflight said 10:07AM on 6-24-2009
Not your business, not the shareholders' business, not anyone's business but his and his family's.
Reply
Jorn said 10:10AM on 6-24-2009
You know that "no iphone news" button at the top? Yeah. Can I get a "no Steve news" button? That'd be sweet. KTHXBAI
Reply