Limitations of the MELD score in predicting mortality or need for removal from waiting list in patients awaiting liver transplantation

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Decompensated cirrhosis is associated with a poor prognosis and liver transplantation provides the only curative treatment option with excellent long-term results. The relative shortage of organ donors renders the allocation algorithms of organs essential. The optimal strategy based on scoring systems and/or waiting time is still under debate.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Data sets of 268 consecutive patients listed for single-organ liver transplantation for nonfulminant liver disease between 2003 and 2005 were included into the study. The Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) and Child-Turcotte-Pugh (CTP) scores of all patients at the time of listing were used for calculation. The predictive ability not only for mortality on the waiting list but also for the need for withdrawal from the waiting list was calculated for both scores. The Mann-Whitney-U Test was used for the univariate analysis and the AUC-Model for discrimination of the scores.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>In the univariate analysis comparing patients who are still on the waiting list and patients who died or were removed from the waiting list due to poor conditions, the serum albumin, bilirubin INR, and CTP and MELD scores as well as the presence of ascites and encephalopathy were significantly different between the groups (p < 0.05), whereas serum creatinine and urea showed no difference.</p> <p>Comparing the predictive abilities of CTP and MELD scores, the best discrimination between patients still alive on the waiting list and patients who died on or were removed from the waiting list was achieved at a CTP score of ≥9 and a MELD score of ≥14.4. The sensitivity and specificity to identify mortality or severe deterioration for CTP was 69.0% and 70.5%, respectively; for MELD, it was 62.1% and 72.7%, respectively. This result was supported by the AUC analysis showing a strong trend for superiority of CTP over MELD scores (AUROC 0.73 and 0.68, resp.; p = 0.091).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The long term prediction of mortality or removal from waiting list in patients awaiting liver transplantation might be better assessed by the CTP score than the MELD score. This might have implications for the development of new improved scoring systems.</p

Patient preferences for the allocation of deceased donor kidneys for transplantation: a mixed methods study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Deceased donor kidneys are a scarce health resource, yet patient preferences for organ allocation are largely unknown. The aim of this study was to determine patient preferences for how kidneys should be allocated for transplantation.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Patients on dialysis and kidney transplant recipients were purposively selected from two centres in Australia to participate in nominal/focus groups in March 2011. Participants identified and ranked criteria they considered important for deceased donor kidney allocation. Transcripts were thematically analysed to identify reasons for their rankings.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>From six groups involving 37 participants, 23 criteria emerged. Most agreed that matching, wait-list time, medical urgency, likelihood of surviving surgery, age, comorbidities, duration of illness, quality of life, number of organs needed and impact on the recipient's life circumstances were important considerations. Underpinning their rankings were four main themes: enhancing life, medical priority, recipient valuation, and deservingness. These were predominantly expressed as achieving equity for all patients, or priority for specific sub-groups of potential recipients regarded as more "deserving".</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Patients believed any wait-listed individual who would gain life expectancy and quality of life compared with dialysis should have access to transplantation. Equity of access to transplantation for all patients and justice for those who would look after their transplant were considered important. A utilitarian rationale based on maximizing health gains from the allocation of a scarce resource to avoid "wastage," were rarely expressed. Organ allocation organisations need to seek input from patients who can articulate preferences for allocation and advocate for equity and justice in organ allocation.</p

Geographic Variability in Access to Primary Kidney Transplantation in the United States, 1996–2005

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/75057/1/j.1600-6143.2007.01785.x.pd

Intravenous mycophenolate mofetil: safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/72291/1/j.1399-0012.2000.140301.x.pd

Pretransplant Prediction of Posttransplant Survival for Liver Recipients with Benign End-Stage Liver Diseases: A Nonlinear Model

Background: The scarcity of grafts available necessitates a system that considers expected posttransplant survival, in addition to pretransplant mortality as estimated by the MELD. So far, however, conventional linear techniques have failed to achieve sufficient accuracy in posttransplant outcome prediction. In this study, we aim to develop a pretransplant predictive model for liver recipients ’ survival with benign end-stage liver diseases (BESLD) by a nonlinear method based on pretransplant characteristics, and compare its performance with a BESLD-specific prognostic model (MELD) and a generalillness severity model (the sequential organ failure assessment score, or SOFA score). Methodology/Principal Findings: With retrospectively collected data on 360 recipients receiving deceased-donor transplantation for BESLD between February 1999 and August 2009 in the west China hospital of Sichuan university, we developed a multi-layer perceptron (MLP) network to predict one-year and two-year survival probability after transplantation. The performances of the MLP, SOFA, and MELD were assessed by measuring both calibration ability and discriminative power, with Hosmer-Lemeshow test and receiver operating characteristic analysis, respectively. By the forward stepwise selection, donor age and BMI; serum concentration of HB, Crea, ALB, TB, ALT, INR, Na +; presence of pretransplant diabetes; dialysis prior to transplantation, and microbiologically proven sepsis were identified to be the optimal input features. The MLP, employing 18 input neurons and 12 hidden neurons, yielded high predictive accuracy, wit

Simultaneous islet-kidney vs pancreas-kidney transplantation in type 1 diabetes mellitus: a 5 year single centre follow-up

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: The aim of this study was to compare the long-term outcomes-in terms of glucose control, renal function and procedure-related complications-of simultaneous islet-kidney (SIK) transplantation with those of simultaneous pancreas-kidney (SPK) transplantation in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus. METHODS: HbA(1c), need for insulin, GFR and complication rate were compared between 13 recipients of SIK and 25 recipients of SPK transplants at the same institution. The mean follow-up was 41 months. RESULTS: Two primary organ non-functions occurred in the SIK group. HbA(1c) did not differ at any time point during follow-up in the SIK group compared with the SPK group (mean during follow-up 6.3 vs 5.9%). Similarly, kidney function over time was not different between the two groups. A higher rate of insulin independence following SPK transplantation (after 1 year 96 vs 31% in the SIK group) was counterbalanced by a higher rate of serious adverse events (40% relaparotomies vs 0% in the SIK group). CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: The endogenous insulin production achieved by islet transplantation, combined with optimal insulin therapy, was sufficient for maintaining near-normal glucose levels. In terms of glucose control, islet transplantation provides results comparable to those achieved with pancreas transplantation. However, SPK results in a higher rate of insulin independence, albeit at the cost of more surgical complications. These results have led to a new paradigm in islet transplantation at our institution, where the primary goal is not insulin independence, but good glucose control and avoidance of severe hypoglycaemia