medigraphic.com
Órgano Oficial de la Asociación Mexicana de Hepatología

2013, Number 5

<< Back Next >>

Ann Hepatol 2013; 12 (5)

Within-patient temporal variance in MELD score and impact on survival prediction after TIPS creation

Gaba RC, Shah KD, CouturePM, Parvinian A, Minocha J, Knuttinen MG, Bui JT

Language: English
References: 15
Page: 797-802
PDF size: 96.33 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Background. To assess within-patient temporal variability in Model for End Stage Liver Disease (MELD) scores and impact on outcome prognostication after transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) creation. Material and methods. In this single institution retrospective study, MELD score was calculated in 68 patients (M:F = 42:26, mean age 55 years) at 4 pre-procedure time points (1, 2-6, 7-14, and 15-35 days) before TIPS creation. Medical record review was used to identify 30- and 90-day clinical outcomes. Within-patient variability in pre-procedure MELD scores was assessed using repeated measures analysis of variance, and the ability of MELD scores at different time points to predict post-TIPS mortality was evaluated by comparing area under receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curves. Results. TIPS were successfully created for ascites (n = 30), variceal hemorrhage (n = 29), hepatic hydrothorax (n = 8), and portal vein thrombosis (n = 1). Pre-TIPS MELD scores showed significant (P = 0.032) within-subject variance that approached ± 18.5%. Higher MELD scores demonstrated greater variability in sequential scores as compared to lower MELD scores. Overall 30- and 90-day patient mortality was 22% (15/67) and 38% (24/64). AUROC curves showed that most recent MELD scores performed on the day of TIPS had superior predictive capacity for 30- (0.876, P = 0.037) and 90-day (0.805 P = 0.020) mortality compared to MELD scores performed 2-6 or 7-14 days prior. Conclusions. In conclusion, MELD scores show within-patient variability over time, and scores calculated on the day of TIPS most accurately predict risk and should be used for patient selection and counseling.


REFERENCES

  1. Kamath PS, Wiesner RH, Malinchoc M, Kremers W, Therneau TM, Kosberg CL, D’Amico G, et al. A model to predict survival in patients with end-stage liver disease. Hepatology 2001; 33: 464-70.

  2. Salerno F, Merli M, Cazzaniga M, Valeriano V, Rossi P, Lovaria A, Meregaglia D, et al. MELD score is better than Child-Pugh score in predicting 3-month survival of patients undergoing transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt. J Hepatol 2002; 36: 494-500.

  3. Schepke M, Roth F, Fimmers R, Brensing KA, Sudhop T, Schild HH, Sauerbruch T. Comparison of MELD, Child-Pugh, and Emory model for the prediction of survival in patients undergoing transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunting. Am J Gastroenterol 2003; 98: 1167-74.

  4. Ferral H, Gamboa P, Postoak DW, Albernaz VS, Young CR, Speeg KV, McMahan CA. Survival after elective transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt creation: prediction with model for end-stage liver disease score. Radiology 2004; 231: 231-6.

  5. Gaba RC, Couture PM, Bui JT, Knuttinen MG, Walzer NM, Kallwitz ER, Berkes JL, et al. Prognostic capability of different liver disease scoring systems for prediction of early mortality after transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt creation. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2012 [In press].

  6. Fitzgerald E, Charles HW, Teperman LW, Babb J, Kovacs S, Aquino T, Clark TW. Within-Patient Variance in MELD Prior to Elective TIPS. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2009; 20: S79.

  7. Gheorghe L, Iacob S, Iacob R, Gheorghe C, Popescu I. Variation of the MELD score as a predictor of death on the waiting list for liver transplantation. J Gastrointestin Liver Dis 2007; 16: 267-72.

  8. Gaba RC, Omene BO, Podczerwinski ES, Knuttinen MG, Cotler SJ, Kallwitz ER, Berkes JL, et al. TIPS for Treatment of Variceal Hemorrhage: Clinical Outcomes in 128 Patients at a Single Institution over a 12-Year Period. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2012; 23: 227-35.

  9. Brown DB, Cardella JF, Sacks D, Goldberg SN, Gervais DA, Rajan D, Vedantham S, et al. Quality improvement guidelines for transhepatic arterial chemoembolization, embolization, and chemotherapeutic infusion for hepatic malignancy. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2006; 17: 225-32.

  10. DeLong ER, DeLong DM, Clarke-Pearson DL. Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: a nonparametric approach. Biometrics 1988; 44: 837-45.

  11. Boyer TD, Haskal ZJ. American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases Practice Guidelines: the role of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt creation in the management of portal hypertension. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2005; 16: 615-29.

  12. Salerno F, Camma C, Enea M, Rossle M, Wong F. Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt for refractory ascites: a meta-analysis of individual patient data. Gastroenterology 2007; 133: 825-34.

  13. Garcia-Pagan JC, Caca K, Bureau C, Laleman W, Appenrodt B, Luca A, Abraldes JG, et al. Early use of TIPS in patients with cirrhosis and variceal bleeding. N Engl J Med 2010; 362: 2370-9.

  14. Bauer J, Johnson S, Durham J, Ludkowski M, Trotter J, Bak T, Wachs M. The role of TIPS for portal vein patency in liver transplant patients with portal vein thrombosis. Liver Transpl 2006; 12: 1544-51.

  15. Kamath PS, Kim WR. The model for end-stage liver disease (MELD). Hepatology 2007; 45: 797-805.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com