BACKGROUND: To improve the outcome of living donor liver transplantation (LDLT), a scoring system that could predict accurately the patient and graft survival posttransplant is necessary. The aim of this study is to evaluate our previously proposed Muscle-model for end-stage liver disease (M-MELD) score and to compare it with the other available scores to find the best system that correlates with postoperative outcome after liver transplant. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the data of 199 patients who underwent LDLT from January 2010 to July 2016 and calculated the preoperative MELD, MELD Na, the product of donor age and MELD (D-MELD), M-MELD, integrated MELD, and the balance of risk (BAR) score in all patients. The area under the receiver operating characteristics curves (AUCs) of each score was computed and compared at 3-, 6-months, and 1-year after LDLT. RESULTS: The M-MELD, D-MELD, and integrated MELD had a good discriminative performance in predicting 3-month mortality after LDLT with AUCs > 0.7, while the M-MELD was the only score that showed a good discriminative performance in predicting 6-month and 1-year mortality after LDLT with AUCs > 0.7. CONCLUSION: Muscle-MELD score is a simple and useful predictor of patient survival after LDLT which showed a better predictive performance than other available scores.
BACKGROUND: To improve the outcome of living donor liver transplantation (LDLT), a scoring system that could predict accurately the patient and graft survival posttransplant is necessary. The aim of this study is to evaluate our previously proposed Muscle-model for end-stage liver disease (M-MELD) score and to compare it with the other available scores to find the best system that correlates with postoperative outcome after liver transplant. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the data of 199 patients who underwent LDLT from January 2010 to July 2016 and calculated the preoperative MELD, MELD Na, the product of donor age and MELD (D-MELD), M-MELD, integrated MELD, and the balance of risk (BAR) score in all patients. The area under the receiver operating characteristics curves (AUCs) of each score was computed and compared at 3-, 6-months, and 1-year after LDLT. RESULTS: The M-MELD, D-MELD, and integrated MELD had a good discriminative performance in predicting 3-month mortality after LDLT with AUCs > 0.7, while the M-MELD was the only score that showed a good discriminative performance in predicting 6-month and 1-year mortality after LDLT with AUCs > 0.7. CONCLUSION: Muscle-MELD score is a simple and useful predictor of patient survival after LDLT which showed a better predictive performance than other available scores.
Entities:
Keywords:
living donor liver transplantation; muscle-MELD; outcome; survival