Literature DB >> 24650058

A new prognostic model to predict dropout from the waiting list in cirrhotic candidates for liver transplantation with MELD score <18.

Maurizio Biselli1, Marco Dall'Agata, Annagiulia Gramenzi, Stefano Gitto, Caterina Liberati, Lucia Brodosi, Matteo Ravaioli, Martina Gambato, Roberto Montalti, Antonio D Pinna, Patrizia Burra, Giorgio E Gerunda, Umberto Cillo, Pietro Andreone, Mauro Bernardi.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) is used for organ allocation in liver transplantation (LT), but its prognostic performance is less accurate in patients with low score. We assess the outcome of patients with MELD < 18 awaiting LT, finding prognostic variables to identify a high dropout risk.
METHODS: Training set consisted of 277 patients and validation cohort of 292 patients. Competing risk regression analysis, taking into account LT, was used for univariate/multivariate analysis.
RESULTS: Ascites, sodium, bilirubin, albumin and glomerular filtration rate were independently associated with a 12-month dropout risk in the training set. Combining these five prognostic parameters, we calculated a new score named liver-renal-risk (LIRER). In the validation set, the 12-month LIRER concordance index showed a discrimination power [0.798, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.793-0.803] better than MELD (0.582, 95% CI 0.575-0.588), Child-Turcotte-Pugh (0.687, 95% CI 0.681-0.693), MELD-sodium (0.721, 95% CI 0.715-0.727) and MELD-ascites-sodium (0.729, 95% CI 0.724-0.735), with a remarkable calibration (Hosmer-Lemeshow test: P = 0.91; R(2) = 0.911). Considering all study patients, the risk of wait list dropout increased with the rise in LIRER. The survival benefit analysis comparing the wait list dropout risk with the mortality of the 216 transplanted patients with same LIRER showed an important benefit for LT in patients with LIRER > 15.9.
CONCLUSIONS: In patients with low MELD (<18), combination of ascites, sodium, albumin, bilirubin and renal function in a new score (LIRER) discriminates patients at high risk of medium-term adverse outcome from those in whom LT may be safely deferred.
© 2014 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  competing risk; liver transplantation; organ allocation; prognosis; scoring system; survival analysis; wait list

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24650058     DOI: 10.1111/liv.12538

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Liver Int        ISSN: 1478-3223            Impact factor:   5.828


  5 in total

1.  Living donor liver transplantation versus donation after brain death and donation after circulatory death liver transplantation in the US.

Authors:  Matthew Black; Amar Gupta; Sumeet K Asrani; Tsung-Wei Ma; Giuliano Testa; Anji Wall
Journal:  Proc (Bayl Univ Med Cent)       Date:  2022-03-09

2.  Outcomes for liver transplant candidates listed with low model for end-stage liver disease score.

Authors:  Allison J Kwong; Jennifer C Lai; Jennifer L Dodge; John P Roberts
Journal:  Liver Transpl       Date:  2015-11       Impact factor: 5.799

3.  Accuracy of the Pediatric End-stage Liver Disease Score in Estimating Pretransplant Mortality Among Pediatric Liver Transplant Candidates.

Authors:  Chung-Chou H Chang; Cindy L Bryce; Benjamin L Shneider; Jonathan G Yabes; Yi Ren; Gabriel L Zenarosa; Heather Tomko; Drew M Donnell; Robert H Squires; Mark S Roberts
Journal:  JAMA Pediatr       Date:  2018-11-01       Impact factor: 16.193

Review 4.  A Comprehensive Review of Outcome Predictors in Low MELD Patients.

Authors:  Nikhilesh R Mazumder; Kofi Atiemo; Matthew Kappus; Giuseppe Cullaro; Matthew E Harinstein; Daniela Ladner; Elizabeth Verna; Jennifer Lai; Josh Levitsky
Journal:  Transplantation       Date:  2020-02       Impact factor: 5.385

Review 5.  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

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.