Assessment of short-term survival after liver transplant by the model for end-stage liver disease

被引:12
作者
Buenadicha, AL
Martín, LG
Martín, EE
Pajares, A
Pérez, AM
Seral, CC
Marugán, RB
机构
[1] Univ Alcala de Henares, Hosp Ramon y Cajal, Dept Digest Surg, Madrid, Spain
[2] Univ Alcala de Henares, Hosp Ramon y Cajal, Dept Anesthesiol, Madrid, Spain
[3] Univ Alcala de Henares, Hosp Ramon y Cajal, Dept Gastroenterol, Madrid, Spain
[4] Univ Alcala de Henares, Hosp Ramon y Cajal, Transplant Unit, Madrid, Spain
关键词
MELD; ALLOCATION; PELD;
D O I
10.1016/j.transproceed.2005.09.165
中图分类号
R392 [医学免疫学]; Q939.91 [免疫学];
学科分类号
071005 [微生物学]; 100108 [医学免疫学];
摘要
The Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score has demonstrated the ability to predict mortality among patients with chronic liver disease on the liver waiting list. The aim of this study was to assess the capability of the MELD score to correctly predict posttransplantation survival in Spain and to determine specific thresholds of MELD above which liver transplantation should be discouraged and the patient removed from the waiting list. Methods. In this study, we retrospectively applied the MELD score to 168 patients at time of transplantation to estimate 1-month and 3-month posttransplant survivals by stratifying them into four groups: group A, MELD score < 10; group B, MELD score 10-18; group Q MELD score 19-24; group D, MELD score > 24. Results. One-, 2-, and 3-month survivals were 84.3%, 80% and 79.5%, respectively. One-, 2-, and 3-month survivals in group A (18 patients) were identical (77.8%). In group B (80 patients), 1-month survival was 84.8%, and 2- and 3-month survivals were 78.4%. In group C (42 patients) 1-month survival was 90.5% and 2- and 3-month survivals were 88%. One-, 2-, and 3-month survivals in group D (28 patients) were 77.9%, 74%, and 70%, respectively. We defined a new group (group E) formed by patients with MELD score <= 24. When we compared 1-, 2-, and 3-month survival rates in group E (85.6%, 81.25%, and 81.25%, respectively) with survival rates in group D, the difference was not significant (P > .05). Conclusions. Although overall outcomes of patients whose MELD scores were high at the time of liver transplantation were inferior to those of patients whose MELD scores were lower, there was no significant difference for specific thresholds of MELD above which liver transplantation should be discouraged and the patient removed from the waiting list.
引用
收藏
页码:3881 / 3883
页数:3
相关论文
共 8 条
[1]
Does MELD work for relisted candidates? [J].
Edwards, E ;
Harper, A .
LIVER TRANSPLANTATION, 2004, 10 (10) :S10-S16
[2]
Results of the first year of the new liver allocation plan [J].
Freeman, RB ;
Wiesner, RH ;
Edwards, E ;
Harper, A ;
Merion, R ;
Wolfe, R .
LIVER TRANSPLANTATION, 2004, 10 (01) :7-15
[3]
How will patients be selected for transplantation in the future? [J].
Lucey, MR .
LIVER TRANSPLANTATION, 2004, 10 (10) :S90-S92
[4]
A model to predict poor survival in patients undergoing transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts [J].
Malinchoc, M ;
Kamath, PS ;
Gordon, FD ;
Peine, CJ ;
Rank, J ;
ter Borg, PCJ .
HEPATOLOGY, 2000, 31 (04) :864-871
[5]
When is a patient too well and when is a patient too sick for a liver transplant? [J].
Merion, RM .
LIVER TRANSPLANTATION, 2004, 10 (10) :S69-S73
[6]
Summary report of a national conference: Evolving concepts in liver allocation in the MELD and PELD era [J].
Olthoff, KM ;
Brown, RS ;
Delmonico, FL ;
Freeman, RB ;
McDiarmid, SV ;
Merion, RM ;
Millis, JM ;
Roberts, JP ;
Shaked, A ;
Wiesner, RH ;
Lucey, MR .
LIVER TRANSPLANTATION, 2004, 10 (10) :A6-A22
[7]
Survival after liver transplantation in the United States: A disease-specific analysis of the UNOS database [J].
Roberts, MS ;
Angus, DC ;
Bryce, CL ;
Valenta, Z ;
Weissfeld, L .
LIVER TRANSPLANTATION, 2004, 10 (07) :886-897
[8]
MELD and PELD: Application of survival models to liver allocation [J].
Wiesner, RH ;
McDiarmid, SV ;
Kamath, PS ;
Edwards, EB ;
Malinchoc, M ;
Kremers, WK ;
Krom, RAF ;
Kim, WR .
LIVER TRANSPLANTATION, 2001, 7 (07) :567-580