Literature DB >> 25218679

Value and limitations of the BAR-score for donor allocation in liver transplantation.

Harald Schrem1, Anna-Luise Platsakis, Alexander Kaltenborn, Armin Koch, Courtney Metz, Marc Barthold, Christian Krauth, Volker Amelung, Felix Braun, Thomas Becker, Jürgen Klempnauer, Benedikt Reichert.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The MELD-score was shown to be able to predict 90-day mortality in most patients with end-stage liver disease prior to liver transplantation and is used as a widely accepted measure for transplantation urgency. Prognostic ability of the BAR-score to predict 90-day post-transplant mortality by detection of unfavourable pretransplant combinations of donor and recipient factors may help to better balance urgency versus utility.
METHODS: Two German cohorts (Hannover, n=453; Kiel, n=234) were retrospectively analyzed using ROC-curve analysis, goodness-of-model-fit tests, summary measures and risk-adjusted multivariate binary regression. Included were all consecutive liver transplants performed in adult recipients (minimum age 18 years). Excluded were all combined transplants and living-related organ donor transplants.
RESULTS: Risk-adjusted multivariate regression revealed that the BAR-score is an independent risk factor for 90-day mortality after transplantation in both cohorts from Hannover and Kiel combined (p<0.001, OR=1.017, 95% CI:1.031-1.113). The area under the ROC-curve (AUROC) for the prediction of 90-day mortality using the BAR-score was 0.662 (95% CI 0.624-0.699, power>95%). Measures for association between observed 90-day mortality and the predicted probabilities in the combined cohort were concordant in 63.5% with low summary measures (Somers' D test 0.32, Goodman-Kruskal Gamma test 0.34 and Kendall's Tau a test 0.07).
CONCLUSIONS: The BAR-score performed below accepted thresholds for potentially useful clinical prognostic models. Prognostic models with better predictive ability with AUROCs>0.700, concordance>70% and larger summary measures are required for the prediction of 90-day post-transplant mortality to enable donor organ allocation with reliable weighing of urgency versus utility.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25218679     DOI: 10.1007/s00423-014-1247-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg        ISSN: 1435-2443            Impact factor:   3.445


  25 in total

Review 1.  Systematic review and validation of prognostic models in liver transplantation.

Authors:  Matthew Jacob; James D Lewsey; Carlos Sharpin; Alexander Gimson; Mohammed Rela; Jan H P van der Meulen
Journal:  Liver Transpl       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 5.799

2.  Sources of bias in the Goodman-Kruskal gamma coefficient measure of association: implications for studies of metacognitive processes.

Authors:  Michael E J Masson; Caren M Rotello
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 3.051

Review 3.  Hepatorenal syndrome, MELD score and liver transplantation: an evolving issue with relevant implications for clinical practice.

Authors:  Paolo Angeli; Pere Gines
Journal:  J Hepatol       Date:  2012-06-26       Impact factor: 25.083

Review 4.  Multivariable prognostic models: issues in developing models, evaluating assumptions and adequacy, and measuring and reducing errors.

Authors:  F E Harrell; K L Lee; D B Mark
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1996-02-28       Impact factor: 2.373

5.  The biopsied donor liver: incorporating macrosteatosis into high-risk donor assessment.

Authors:  Austin L Spitzer; Oliver B Lao; André A S Dick; Ramasamy Bakthavatsalam; Jeffrey B Halldorson; Matthew M Yeh; Melissa P Upton; Jorge D Reyes; James D Perkins
Journal:  Liver Transpl       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 5.799

6.  Are there better guidelines for allocation in liver transplantation? A novel score targeting justice and utility in the model for end-stage liver disease era.

Authors:  Philipp Dutkowski; Christian E Oberkofler; Ksenija Slankamenac; Milo A Puhan; Erik Schadde; Beat Müllhaupt; Andreas Geier; Pierre A Clavien
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2011-11       Impact factor: 12.969

7.  Charting patients' course: a comparison of statistics used to summarize patient course in longitudinal and repeated measures studies.

Authors:  S Arndt; C Turvey; W H Coryell; J D Dawson; A C Leon; H S Akiskal
Journal:  J Psychiatr Res       Date:  2000 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 4.791

8.  Concordance for prognostic models with competing risks.

Authors:  Marcel Wolbers; Paul Blanche; Michael T Koller; Jacqueline C M Witteman; Thomas A Gerds
Journal:  Biostatistics       Date:  2014-02-02       Impact factor: 5.899

9.  Respiratory risk score for the prediction of 3-month mortality and prolonged ventilation after liver transplantation.

Authors:  Moritz Kleine; Florian W R Vondran; Kai Johanning; Kai Timrott; Hüseyin Bektas; Frank Lehner; Juergen Klempnauer; Harald Schrem
Journal:  Liver Transpl       Date:  2013-07-25       Impact factor: 5.799

10.  Prognostic limitations of the Eurotransplant-Donor Risk Index in liver transplantation.

Authors:  Benedikt Reichert; Alexander Kaltenborn; Alon Goldis; Harald Schrem
Journal:  J Negat Results Biomed       Date:  2013-12-24
View more
  5 in total

1.  Use of BAR score as predictor of short and long-term survival of liver transplantation patients.

Authors:  Chung-Mau Lo
Journal:  Hepatol Int       Date:  2014-10-31       Impact factor: 6.047

2.  Predictive Capacity of Risk Models in Liver Transplantation.

Authors:  Jacob D de Boer; Hein Putter; Joris J Blok; Ian P J Alwayn; Bart van Hoek; Andries E Braat
Journal:  Transplant Direct       Date:  2019-05-22

3.  Potential value and limitations of different clinical scoring systems in the assessment of short- and long-term outcome following orthotopic liver transplantation.

Authors:  Joerg Boecker; Zoltan Czigany; Jan Bednarsch; Iakovos Amygdalos; Franziska Meister; Daniel Antonio Morales Santana; Wen-Jia Liu; Pavel Strnad; Ulf Peter Neumann; Georg Lurje
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-03-21       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  BAR Score Performance in Predicting Survival after Living Donor Liver Transplantation: A Single-Center Retrospective Study.

Authors:  Talaat Zakareya; Mohammad Taha; Hassan Elzohry; Ehab Darwiesh; Reda Aglan; Mostafa Elhelbawy; Hazem Zakaria; Mohamed Deif; Mohamed Abbasy
Journal:  Can J Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2022-02-18

5.  The Graz Liver Allocation Strategy-Impact of Extended Criteria Grafts on Outcome Considering Immunological Aspects.

Authors:  Judith Kahn; Gudrun Pregartner; Alexander Avian; Daniela Kniepeiss; Helmut Müller; Peter Schemmer
Journal:  Front Immunol       Date:  2020-08-04       Impact factor: 7.561

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.