4%, P = .01; third in the nation). OE ratio was higher in Mexico states outside the MAVM (CDMX 10.1, 2.1 vs 29.4, 26.5; P = .009). CONCLUSIONS Analysis of deceased donation and transplantation of Mexican states without considering the metropolitan areas is insufficient. To consider CDMX as a region without acknowledging the MAVM leads to an inappropriately small denominator during efficiency analysis. BACKGROUND Transplantation depends on a donation from a living or deceased donor, with the latter ideally involving a multiorgan transplant. The objective of this study was to determine the factors that influence the attitudes of the population in Mexico toward being a donor. METHODS We conducted an observational, cross-sectional study with a survey on the attitudes toward donation in the population of Mexico. The survey had 33 items on it regarding sociodemographic aspects and people’s positions on the issues of organ and tissue donation. We used central tendency and dispersion averages and calculated the difference between groups using chi squares or the Student t test. We also used the statistical program SPSS version 25. RESULTS The perception of respondents regarding organ and tissue donation (with 1064 people or 65.1% in favor) points to a lack of knowledge in Mexico. People do not talk about organ donation with their relatives and especially do not discuss their wishes in case of death (only 660 people indicated they had or 40.4%). There is a better attitude toward donation among younger respondents, women, single people, health personnel, people with higher incomes, Catholics, and those who do not have a hospitalized family member. CONCLUSIONS It is necessary to provide more information about organ donation to people in Mexico. JAK phosphorylation The opinion toward donation is generally favorable; however, there are multiple factors that influence opinions. Family members of patients in intensive care are the least willing to donate themselves or donate a relative’s organs. BACKGROUND Bone mineral disease after transplantation persists and is an issue that must be addressed owing to the cardiovascular impact it presents. The objective of this study is to present the behavior of calcium, phosphorus, and parathormone (PTH) before renal transplantation (RT) and throughout the 12 months after transplant surgery. METHODS A longitudinal observational study of RT patients was performed from 2013 to 2017 in 2 renal transplant units in Mexico. In total, 1009 records of patients with RT were analyzed. Calcium, phosphorus, and PTH levels were studied before transplantation and for 12 months after. Central tendency and dispersion were measured, the difference of means was established with chi square or student t tests, and the significant value of P was set at  less then .05. We also used the SPSS statistical package, version 25. RESULTS Phosphorus had a median pre-RT of 5.73, which decreased to 2.8 in the first month post-transplant and then increased to 3.41 at 12 months post-RT. The median PTH, on the other hand, started at 420.60 and decreased to 67.45. Calcium began at 9.04 and hit a plateau of 9.58 during month 12 after the surgical event. CONCLUSIONS Of the 3 biochemical parameters evaluated, phosphorus was the one that most corrected itself after transplantation. Despite a tendency toward hypophosphatemia in the first month after transplantation, it began to normalize from month 6 on. Meanwhile, calcium was the biochemical value that changed the least after transplantation. BACKGROUND Pediatric liver transplantation (LT) can affect recipients’ family function; however, inconsistent results between studies exist, and data from developing nations are sparse. We aimed to evaluate family function and identify factors associated with suboptimal function in pediatric LT recipients. METHODS A cross-sectional study was performed at a teaching hospital in Bangkok, Thailand between May 2018 and December 2018. We included the families of children aged 2 to 18 years who underwent LT for at least 1 year. Chulalongkorn Family Inventory (CFI) was used to evaluate the family function in these children comparing with families of healthy children. Family function was interpreted from the total CFI score and characterized as dysfunctional, normal-functioned, and well-functioned. RESULTS We enrolled families of 82 LT recipients and 72 healthy children. LT recipients had median age of 7.4 (interquartile range 4.5-10.3) years. Eighteen children (22%) had a single parent, and at least one unemployed parent was reported in 25%. Most (96%) had well-functioned families, and none had a dysfunctional family. Furthermore, the total score was not significantly different between families of LT and healthy children (P = .95). LT families had a higher score in problem-solving (P less then .01) and lower score in the affective involvement and general functioning dimension (P  less then .01 and .02, respectively). Among the LT children, postoperative bile leakage was associated with lower overall family function score. CONCLUSIONS Even though most recipients had good family function, physicians should pay close attention to specific aspects of family function, especially in children with certain postoperative complications. BACKGROUND In Mexico during 2018, 15,072 patients were waiting for a deceased donor kidney transplant, and 969 deceased donor kidney transplants were performed. There is no annual data report of the waiting list activity in Mexico. Herein, we analyzed our kidney transplant waiting list activity in 2018. METHODS We performed a waiting list analysis in our unit during 2018. Patient and status characteristics (active, deceased, inactive, or transplant) were registered. Differences between status were determined. A P  less then .05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS In total, 467 patients were waiting, and 74 patients were included on the list (57.7% male, mean age 38.5 ± 11.3 years and mean BMI 24.9 ± 4.7 kg/m2); 92.8% were state residents. The most common end-stage renal disease diagnosis was unknown (40.9%). In total, 94.9% were on dialysis (mean time 5.1 ± 3.14 years), and for 90.9%, this was the first transplant. PRA class I and class II were 19.9% ± 30.6% and 12.9% ± 27.1%, respectively. Mean EPTS was 19.