BACKGROUND & AIMS: Cirrhotic patients undergoing transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) for refractory ascites or recurrent variceal bleeding are at risk for decompensation and death. This study examined whether a new model for end stage liver disease (MELD), which incorporates serum sodium (MELDNa), is a better predictor of death or transplant after TIPS than the original MELD. METHODS: One hundred forty-eight consecutive patients undergoing nonemergent TIPS for refractory ascites or recurrent variceal bleeding from 1997 to 2006 at a single center were evaluated retrospectively. Cox model analysis was performed with death or transplant within 6 months as the end point. The models were compared using the Harrell's C index. Recursive partitioning determined the optimal MELDNa cutoff to maximize the risk:benefit ratio of TIPS. RESULTS: The predictive ability of MELDNa was superior to MELD, particularly in patients with low MELD scores. The C indices (95% confidence interval [CI]) for MELDNa and MELD were 0.65 (95% CI, 0.55-0.71) and 0.58 (95% CI, 0.51-0.67) using a cut-off score of 18, and 0.72 (95% CI, 0.60-0.85) and 0.62 (95% CI, 0.49-0.74) using a cut-off score of 15. Using a MELDNa >15, 22% of patients were reclassified to a higher risk with an event rate of 44% compared with 10% when the score was <or=15. CONCLUSIONS: MELDNa performed better than MELD in predicting death or transplant after non-emergent TIPS, especially in patients with low MELD scores. A MELD score <or=18 can provide a false positive prognosis; a MELDNa score <or=15 provides a more accurate risk prediction.
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Cirrhotic patients undergoing transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) for refractory ascites or recurrent variceal bleeding are at risk for decompensation and death. This study examined whether a new model for end stage liver disease (MELD), which incorporates serum sodium (MELDNa), is a better predictor of death or transplant after TIPS than the original MELD. METHODS: One hundred forty-eight consecutive patients undergoing nonemergent TIPS for refractory ascites or recurrent variceal bleeding from 1997 to 2006 at a single center were evaluated retrospectively. Cox model analysis was performed with death or transplant within 6 months as the end point. The models were compared using the Harrell's C index. Recursive partitioning determined the optimal MELDNa cutoff to maximize the risk:benefit ratio of TIPS. RESULTS: The predictive ability of MELDNa was superior to MELD, particularly in patients with low MELD scores. The C indices (95% confidence interval [CI]) for MELDNa and MELD were 0.65 (95% CI, 0.55-0.71) and 0.58 (95% CI, 0.51-0.67) using a cut-off score of 18, and 0.72 (95% CI, 0.60-0.85) and 0.62 (95% CI, 0.49-0.74) using a cut-off score of 15. Using a MELDNa >15, 22% of patients were reclassified to a higher risk with an event rate of 44% compared with 10% when the score was <or=15. CONCLUSIONS: MELDNa performed better than MELD in predicting death or transplant after non-emergent TIPS, especially in patients with low MELD scores. A MELD score <or=18 can provide a false positive prognosis; a MELDNa score <or=15 provides a more accurate risk prediction.
Authors: Scott W Biggins; Harry J Rodriguez; Peter Bacchetti; Nathan M Bass; John P Roberts; Norah A Terrault Journal: Hepatology Date: 2005-01 Impact factor: 17.425
Authors: G Fernández-Esparrach; A Sánchez-Fueyo; P Ginès; J Uriz; L Quintó; P J Ventura; A Cárdenas; M Guevara; P Sort; W Jiménez; R Bataller; V Arroyo; J Rodés Journal: J Hepatol Date: 2001-01 Impact factor: 25.083
Authors: M Rössle; A Ochs; V Gülberg; V Siegerstetter; J Holl; P Deibert; M Olschewski; M Reiser; A L Gerbes Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2000-06-08 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: K Thomopoulos; G Theocharis; K Mimidis; Ch Lampropoulou-Karatza; E Alexandridis; V Nikolopoulou Journal: Dig Liver Dis Date: 2006-09-26 Impact factor: 4.088
Authors: W Ray Kim; Scott W Biggins; Walter K Kremers; Russell H Wiesner; Patrick S Kamath; Joanne T Benson; Erick Edwards; Terry M Therneau Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2008-09-04 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Ahmad Parvinian; James T Bui; M Grace Knuttinen; Jeet Minocha; Ron C Gaba Journal: Diagn Interv Radiol Date: 2014 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 2.630
Authors: Reham Abdel-Wahab; Manal M Hassan; Bhawana George; Roberto Carmagnani Pestana; Lianchun Xiao; Sahin Lacin; Suayib Yalcin; Ahmed S Shalaby; Humaid O Al-Shamsi; Kanwal Raghav; Robert A Wolff; James C Yao; Lauren Girard; Abedul Haque; Dan G Duda; Simona Dima; Irinel Popescu; Hesham A Elghazaly; Jean-Nicolas Vauthey; Thomas A Aloia; Ching-Wei Tzeng; Yun Shin Chun; Asif Rashid; Jeffrey S Morris; Hesham M Amin; Ahmed O Kaseb Journal: Oncology Date: 2020-10-07 Impact factor: 2.935
Authors: Justin Richard Boike; Nikhilesh Ray Mazumder; Kanti Pallav Kolli; Jin Ge; Margarita German; Nathaniel Jest; Giuseppe Morelli; Erin Spengler; Adnan Said; Jennifer C Lai; Archita P Desai; Thomas Couri; Sonali Paul; Catherine Frenette; Elizabeth C Verna; Usman Rahim; Aparna Goel; Dyanna Gregory; Bartley Thornburg; Lisa B VanWagner Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2021-10-01 Impact factor: 12.045