AIM: Model of End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) score has recently gained wide acceptance over the old Child-Pugh score in predicting survival in patients with decompensated cirrhosis, although it is more sophisticated. We compared the predictive values of MELD, Child-Pugh and creatinine-modified Child-Pugh scores in decompensated cirrhosis. METHODS: A cohort of 102 patients with decompensated cirrhosis followed-up for a median of 6 mo was studied. Two types of modified Child-Pugh scores estimated by adding 0-4 points to the original score using creatinine levels as a sixth categorical variable were evaluated. RESULTS: The areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves did not differ significantly among the four scores, but none had excellent diagnostic accuracy (areas: 0.71-0.79). Child-Pugh score appeared to be the worst, while the accuracy of MELD was almost identical with that of modified Child-Pugh in predicting short-term and slightly better in predicting medium-term survival. In Cox regression analysis, all four scores were significantly associated with survival, while MELD and creatinine-modified Child-Pugh scores had better predictive values (c-statistics: 0.73 and 0.69-0.70) than Child-Pugh score (c-statistics: 0.65). Adjustment for gamma-glutamate transpeptidase levels increased the predictive values of all systems (c-statistics: 0.77-0.81). Analysis of the expected and observed survival curves in patients subgroups according to their prognosis showed that all models fit the data reasonably well with MELD probably discriminating better the subgroups with worse prognosis. CONCLUSION: MELD compared to the old Child-Pugh and particularly to creatinine-modified Child-Pugh scores does not appear to offer a clear advantage in predicting survival in patients with decompensated cirrhosis in daily clinical practice.
AIM: Model of End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) score has recently gained wide acceptance over the old Child-Pugh score in predicting survival in patients with decompensated cirrhosis, although it is more sophisticated. We compared the predictive values of MELD, Child-Pugh and creatinine-modified Child-Pugh scores in decompensated cirrhosis. METHODS: A cohort of 102 patients with decompensated cirrhosis followed-up for a median of 6 mo was studied. Two types of modified Child-Pugh scores estimated by adding 0-4 points to the original score using creatinine levels as a sixth categorical variable were evaluated. RESULTS: The areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves did not differ significantly among the four scores, but none had excellent diagnostic accuracy (areas: 0.71-0.79). Child-Pugh score appeared to be the worst, while the accuracy of MELD was almost identical with that of modified Child-Pugh in predicting short-term and slightly better in predicting medium-term survival. In Cox regression analysis, all four scores were significantly associated with survival, while MELD and creatinine-modified Child-Pugh scores had better predictive values (c-statistics: 0.73 and 0.69-0.70) than Child-Pugh score (c-statistics: 0.65). Adjustment for gamma-glutamate transpeptidase levels increased the predictive values of all systems (c-statistics: 0.77-0.81). Analysis of the expected and observed survival curves in patients subgroups according to their prognosis showed that all models fit the data reasonably well with MELD probably discriminating better the subgroups with worse prognosis. CONCLUSION: MELD compared to the old Child-Pugh and particularly to creatinine-modified Child-Pugh scores does not appear to offer a clear advantage in predicting survival in patients with decompensated cirrhosis in daily clinical practice.
Authors: R H Wiesner; S V McDiarmid; P S Kamath; E B Edwards; M Malinchoc; W K Kremers; R A Krom; W R Kim Journal: Liver Transpl Date: 2001-07 Impact factor: 5.799
Authors: P S Kamath; R H Wiesner; M Malinchoc; W Kremers; T M Therneau; C L Kosberg; G D'Amico; E R Dickson; W R Kim Journal: Hepatology Date: 2001-02 Impact factor: 17.425
Authors: M Adler; D Verset; H Bouhdid; N Bourgeois; B Gulbis; O Le Moine; J Van de Stadt; M Gelin; P Thiry Journal: J Hepatol Date: 1997-03 Impact factor: 25.083
Authors: B Angermayr; M Cejna; F Karnel; M Gschwantler; F Koenig; J Pidlich; H Mendel; L Pichler; M Wichlas; A Kreil; M Schmid; A Ferlitsch; E Lipinski; H Brunner; J Lammer; P Ferenci; A Gangl; M Peck-Radosavljevic Journal: Gut Date: 2003-06 Impact factor: 23.059
Authors: J P Villeneuve; C Infante-Rivard; M Ampelas; G Pomier-Layrargues; P M Huet; D Marleau Journal: Hepatology Date: 1986 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 17.425
Authors: Mitchell S Wachtel; Yan Zhang; Kim E Kaye; Maurizio Chiriva-Internati; Eldo E Frezza Journal: Dig Dis Sci Date: 2007-04-04 Impact factor: 3.199
Authors: Mirjana M Radisavljevic; Goran B Bjelakovic; Aleksandar V Nagorni; Miroslav P Stojanovic; Milan D Radojkovicn; Jasna Z Jovic; Aleksandra M Ignjatovic; Misa M Radisavljevic; Maja M Simonovic Journal: Med Princ Pract Date: 2016-09-27 Impact factor: 1.927