Literature DB >> 22480831

Child-Turcotte score versus MELD for prognosis in a randomized controlled trial of emergency treatment of bleeding esophageal varices in cirrhosis.

Marshall J Orloff1, Florin Vaida, Jon I Isenberg, Henry O Wheeler, Kevin S Haynes, Horacio Jinich-Brook, Roderick Rapier, Robert J Hye, Susan L Orloff.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Bleeding esophageal varices is responsible for much of the high mortality rate in cirrhosis. An important objective of management of bleeding varices is to develop reliable tools for predicting survival, controlling bleeding and encephalopathy, and improve quality of life. This study compared two widely used prognostic tools, the model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) and the Child-Turcotte (C-T) score, in a randomized controlled trial of emergency treatment of bleeding varices.
METHODS: We randomized 211 unselected consecutive patients with cirrhosis and bleeding varices to endoscopic sclerotherapy (n = 106) or emergency portacaval shunt (n = 105). Diagnosis and treatment were accomplished within 20 hours. Follow-up was 100% for 10 y. We compared the prognostic powers of MELD and C-T upon entry, and then monthly for the first year and every 3 months thereafter. Statistical analysis included computation of receiver operating curves, the area under the curve, and the proportion of variability.
RESULTS: In baseline determinations of MELD versus C-T, there were no significant differences in predicting survival, recurrent encephalopathy, and rebleeding. The Child-Turcotte score was a stronger predictor than MELD of hospital readmissions and readmission days. In serial determinations over years, the prognostic power of both MELD and C-T was substantial, but C-T was significantly more effective in predicting survival and time to recurrent encephalopathy.
CONCLUSIONS: In this first long-term comparison of MELD versus C-T in cirrhosis with bleeding varices, C-T was consistently as effective as MELD in predicting survival, encephalopathy, rebleeding, hospital readmissions, and readmission days. In some measures, C-T was a more effective prognostic tool than MELD.
Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22480831     DOI: 10.1016/j.jss.2012.01.004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Surg Res        ISSN: 0022-4804            Impact factor:   2.192


  6 in total

1.  Child-Pugh versus MELD score for predicting the in-hospital mortality of acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding in liver cirrhosis.

Authors:  Ying Peng; Xingshun Qi; Junna Dai; Hongyu Li; Xiaozhong Guo
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Med       Date:  2015-01-15

Review 2.  Model for End-stage Liver Disease.

Authors:  Ashwani K Singal; Patrick S Kamath
Journal:  J Clin Exp Hepatol       Date:  2012-12-01

3.  Randomized controlled trial of emergency transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt versus emergency portacaval shunt treatment of acute bleeding esophageal varices in cirrhosis.

Authors:  Marshall J Orloff; Florin Vaida; Kevin S Haynes; Robert J Hye; Jon I Isenberg; Horacio Jinich-Brook
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2012-09-25       Impact factor: 3.452

4.  Treatment for bleeding oesophageal varices in people with decompensated liver cirrhosis: a network meta-analysis.

Authors:  Danielle Roberts; Lawrence Mj Best; Suzanne C Freeman; Alex J Sutton; Nicola J Cooper; Sivapatham Arunan; Tanjia Begum; Norman R Williams; Dana Walshaw; Elisabeth Jane Milne; Maxine Tapp; Mario Csenar; Chavdar S Pavlov; Brian R Davidson; Emmanuel Tsochatzis; Kurinchi Selvan Gurusamy
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2021-04-10

5.  Introducing an optimal liver allocation system for liver cirrhosis patients.

Authors:  Jamileh Abolghasemi; Mohammad Reza Eshraghian; Mohsen Nasiri Toosi; Mahmood Mahmoodi; Abbas Rahimi Foroushani
Journal:  Hepat Mon       Date:  2013-08-30       Impact factor: 0.660

Review 6.  Child-Pugh Versus MELD Score for the Assessment of Prognosis in Liver Cirrhosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies.

Authors:  Ying Peng; Xingshun Qi; Xiaozhong Guo
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 1.889

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.