Literature DB >> 21045793

Prioritization for liver transplantation.

Evangelos Cholongitas1, Giacomo Germani, Andrew K Burroughs.   

Abstract

There are three possible policies for prioritization for liver transplantation: medical urgency, utility and transplant benefit. The first is based on the severity of cirrhosis, using Child-Turcotte-Pugh score and, more recently, the Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) score, or variants of MELD, for allocation. Although prospectively developed and validated, the MELD score has several limitations, including interlaboratory variations for measurement of serum creatinine and international normalized ratio of prothrombin time, and a systematic adverse female gender bias. Adjustments to the original MELD equation and new scoring systems have been proposed to overcome these limitations; incorporation of serum sodium improves its predictive accuracy. The MELD score poorly predicts outcomes after liver transplantation due to the absence of donor factors incorporated into the scoring system. Several utility models are based on donor and recipient characteristics. Combined poor recipient and donor characteristics lead to very poor outcomes, which in a utility system would be considered unacceptable. Finally, transplant benefit models rank patients according to the net survival benefit that they would derive from transplantation. However, complex statistical models are required, and unmeasured characteristics may unduly affect the models. Well-designed prospective studies and simulation models are necessary to establish the optimal allocation system in liver transplantation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 21045793     DOI: 10.1038/nrgastro.2010.169

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol        ISSN: 1759-5045            Impact factor:   46.802


  97 in total

1.  Predicting survival among patients listed for liver transplantation: an assessment of serial MELD measurements.

Authors:  Kiran Bambha; W Ray Kim; Walter K Kremers; Terry M Therneau; Patrick S Kamath; Russell Wiesner; Charles B Rosen; Jeff Thostenson; Joanne T Benson; E Rolland Dickson
Journal:  Am J Transplant       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 8.086

2.  An integrated MELD model including serum sodium and age improves the prediction of early mortality in patients with cirrhosis.

Authors:  Angelo Luca; Berhard Angermayr; Guido Bertolini; Franz Koenig; Giovanni Vizzini; Martin Ploner; Markus Peck-Radosavljevic; Bruno Gridelli; Jaime Bosch
Journal:  Liver Transpl       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 5.799

3.  Disparities in liver transplantation in the post-model for end-stage liver disease era: are we there yet?

Authors:  Parul Dureja; Michael R Lucey
Journal:  Hepatology       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 17.425

4.  MELD fails to measure quality of life in liver transplant candidates.

Authors:  Sammy Saab; Ayman B Ibrahim; Alexander Shpaner; Zobair M Younossi; Cindy Lee; Francisco Durazo; Steven Han; Karl Esrason; Victor Wu; Jonathan Hiatt; Douglas G Farmer; R Mark Ghobrial; Curtis Holt; Hasan Yersiz; Leonard I Goldstein; Myron J Tong; Ronald W Busuttil
Journal:  Liver Transpl       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 5.799

5.  Infections in patients with cirrhosis increase mortality four-fold and should be used in determining prognosis.

Authors:  Vasiliki Arvaniti; Gennaro D'Amico; Giuseppe Fede; Pinelopi Manousou; Emmanuel Tsochatzis; Maria Pleguezuelo; Andrew Kenneth Burroughs
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2010-06-14       Impact factor: 22.682

Review 6.  The model for end-stage liver disease (MELD).

Authors:  Patrick S Kamath; W Ray Kim
Journal:  Hepatology       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 17.425

7.  The survival benefit of liver transplantation.

Authors:  Robert M Merion; Douglas E Schaubel; Dawn M Dykstra; Richard B Freeman; Friedrich K Port; Robert A Wolfe
Journal:  Am J Transplant       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 8.086

8.  Should liver transplantation in patients with model for end-stage liver disease scores <or= 14 be avoided? A decision analysis approach.

Authors:  James D Perkins; Jeffrey B Halldorson; Ramasamy Bakthavatsalam; Oren K Fix; Robert L Carithers; Jorge D Reyes
Journal:  Liver Transpl       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 5.799

9.  Selection of patients for liver transplantation and allocation of donated livers in the UK.

Authors:  J Neuberger; A Gimson; M Davies; M Akyol; J O'Grady; A Burroughs; M Hudson
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2007-09-25       Impact factor: 23.059

10.  Is the corrected-creatinine model for end-stage liver disease a feasible strategy to adjust gender difference in organ allocation for liver transplantation?

Authors:  Samantha C Huo; Teh-Ia Huo; Han-Chieh Lin; Chin-Wen Chi; Pui-Ching Lee; Fan-Wei Tseng; Shou-Dong Lee
Journal:  Transplantation       Date:  2007-12-15       Impact factor: 4.939

View more
  19 in total

1.  Liver transplantation: Toward a unified allocation system.

Authors:  Ali Zarrinpar; Ronald W Busuttil
Journal:  Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2011-10-05       Impact factor: 46.802

Review 2.  Management of patients with hepatitis B in special populations.

Authors:  Evangelos Cholongitas; Konstantinos Tziomalos; Chrysoula Pipili
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2015-02-14       Impact factor: 5.742

Review 3.  Renal dysfunction in patients with cirrhosis: Where do we stand?

Authors:  Chrysoula Pipili; Evangelos Cholongitas
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2014-08-06

4.  Liver transplantation in adults: Choosing the appropriate timing.

Authors:  Maria Siciliano; Lucia Parlati; Federica Maldarelli; Massimo Rossi; Stefano Ginanni Corradini
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2012-08-06

Review 5.  Liver transplantation: past, present and future.

Authors:  Ali Zarrinpar; Ronald W Busuttil
Journal:  Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2013-06-11       Impact factor: 46.802

6.  The corneal transplant score: a simple corneal graft candidate calculator.

Authors:  Eldar Rosenfeld; David Varssano
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2013-05-07       Impact factor: 3.117

Review 7.  The evolution in the prioritization for liver transplantation.

Authors:  Evangelos Cholongitas; Andrew K Burroughs
Journal:  Ann Gastroenterol       Date:  2012

8.  Impact of different creatinine measurement methods on liver transplant allocation.

Authors:  Thorsten Kaiser; Benedict Kinny-Köster; Michael Bartels; Tanja Parthaune; Michael Schmidt; Joachim Thiery
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-02-27       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasonography-Based Hepatic Perfusion for Early Prediction of Prognosis in Acute Liver Failure.

Authors:  Hidekatsu Kuroda; Tamami Abe; Yudai Fujiwara; Tomoaki Nagasawa; Yuji Suzuki; Keisuke Kakisaka; Yasuhiro Takikawa
Journal:  Hepatology       Date:  2021-05-24       Impact factor: 17.425

Review 10.  How to diagnose and manage hepatic encephalopathy: a consensus statement on roles and responsibilities beyond the liver specialist.

Authors:  Debbie L Shawcross; Arthur A Dunk; Rajiv Jalan; Gerald Kircheis; Robert J de Knegt; Wim Laleman; John K Ramage; Heiner Wedemeyer; Ian E J Morgan
Journal:  Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 2.566

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.