Literature DB >> 19150311

International normalized ratio of prothrombin time in the model for end-stage liver disease score: an unreliable measure.

Russ Arjal1, James F Trotter2.   

Abstract

The current basis for deceased donor liver allocation is the Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) score, which is an objective means of predicting 90-day patient survival. Although the MELD system is a vast improvement over the prior allocation scheme, published studies have refuted the United Network for Organ Sharing statement that "the MELD and PELD [Pediatric End-stage Liver Disease] formulas are simple, objective and verifiable and yield consistent results whenever the score is calculated." In particular, wide inter-laboratory variation exists in the most heavily weighted MELD determinant, the international normalized ratio (INR). Whether this variation impacts the equitable distribution of deceased donor livers is unclear. However, the current technique for measuring the INR has the potential to detract from the expressed purpose of MELD-based allocation, which is to prioritize liver transplant candidates across the country with parity, using an objective scoring system.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19150311     DOI: 10.1016/j.cld.2008.09.009

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Liver Dis        ISSN: 1089-3261            Impact factor:   6.126


  10 in total

Review 1.  Portal vein thrombosis in cirrhosis: Controversies and latest developments.

Authors:  Damian J Harding; M Thamara P R Perera; Frederick Chen; Simon Olliff; Dhiraj Tripathi
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2015-06-14       Impact factor: 5.742

Review 2.  Portal vein thrombosis in liver cirrhosis.

Authors:  Nao Kinjo; Hirofumi Kawanaka; Tomohiko Akahoshi; Yoshihiro Matsumoto; Masahiro Kamori; Yoshihiro Nagao; Naotaka Hashimoto; Hideo Uehara; Morimasa Tomikawa; Ken Shirabe; Yoshihiko Maehara
Journal:  World J Hepatol       Date:  2014-02-27

3.  Portal vein thrombosis in patients with cirrhosis: underdiagnosis and undertreatment?

Authors:  Aaron Liew; James Douketis
Journal:  Intern Emerg Med       Date:  2016-05-23       Impact factor: 3.397

Review 4.  Portal vein thrombosis in cirrhosis.

Authors:  Kaiser Raja; Mathew Jacob; Sonal Asthana
Journal:  J Clin Exp Hepatol       Date:  2013-12-31

Review 5.  Model for end-stage liver disease: end of the first decade.

Authors:  Sumeet K Asrani; W Ray Kim
Journal:  Clin Liver Dis       Date:  2011-10-01       Impact factor: 6.126

6.  Safety, efficacy, and response predictors of anticoagulation for the treatment of nonmalignant portal-vein thrombosis in patients with cirrhosis: a propensity score matching analysis.

Authors:  Jung Wha Chung; Gi Hyun Kim; Jong Ho Lee; Kyeong Sam Ok; Eun Sun Jang; Sook-Hyang Jeong; Jin-Wook Kim
Journal:  Clin Mol Hepatol       Date:  2014-12-24

Review 7.  Model for end-stage liver disease score and MELD exceptions: 15 years later.

Authors:  Sumeet K Asrani; Patrick S Kamath
Journal:  Hepatol Int       Date:  2015-05-28       Impact factor: 6.047

8.  Comparison of modes of prothrombin time reporting in patients with advanced liver disease associated with viral hepatitis.

Authors:  YuXiang Wei; DeHua Zheng; Li Xiao; BingYi Shi
Journal:  J Thromb Thrombolysis       Date:  2009-03-28       Impact factor: 2.300

Review 9.  Important predictor of mortality in patients with end-stage liver disease.

Authors:  Hyung Joon Kim; Hyun Woong Lee
Journal:  Clin Mol Hepatol       Date:  2013-06-27

Review 10.  Nonsurgical Therapeutic Options in Portal Vein Thrombosis.

Authors:  Michael Schultheiß; Dominik Bettinger; Robert Thimme
Journal:  Viszeralmedizin       Date:  2014-12
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.