medigraphic.com
Órgano Oficial de la Asociación Mexicana de Hepatología

2013, Number 3

<< Back Next >>

Ann Hepatol 2013; 12 (3)

Impact of creatinine values on MELD scores in male and female candidates for liver transplantation

Mariante-Neto G, Marroni CP, Fleck JAM, Marroni CA, Zanotelli ML, Cantisani G, Brandão ABM

Language: English
References: 19
Page: 434-439
PDF size: 108.31 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Introduction. A systematic bias against women, resulting from the use of creatinine as a measure of renal function, has been identified in Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD)-based liver allocation. Correction of this bias by calculation of female creatinine levels using the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) formula has been suggested. Material and methods. A cohort of 639 cirrhotic candidates for firsttime liver transplantation was studied. Creatinine levels were corrected for gender using the MDRD formula. The accuracy of MELD, with or without creatinine correction, to predict 3- and 6-month mortality after inclusion in a transplant waiting list was estimated. Results. Women exhibited significantly lower creatinine levels, glomerular filtration rate, and MELD scores than men. After creatinine correction, female MELD scores had a mean increase of 1.1 points. Creatinine correction yielded an increase of 3 points in the MELD score in 15.2% of patients, 2 points in 22.4%, and 1 point in 17.6% of patients. The likelihood of death at 3 and 6 months after enrollment in the transplant waiting list was similar in males and females and the likelihood of receiving a transplant, as assessed by Kaplan-Meier survival curves, was also similar in males and females. Conclusion. The survival or the likelihood of receiving a transplant while on the waiting list were similar in men and women in both pre- and post-MELD eras and creatinine correction did not increase the accuracy of the MELD score in estimating 3- and 6-month mortality in female candidates for liver transplantation.


REFERENCES

  1. Malinchoc M, Kamath PS, Gordon FD, Peine CJ, Rank J, ter Borg PC. A model to predict poor survival in patients undergoing transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts. Hepatology 2000; 31: 864-71.

  2. 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.

  3. Wiesner R, Edwards E, Freeman R, Harper A, Kim R, Kamath P, Kremers W, et al. Model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) and allocation of donor livers. Gastroenterology 2003; 124: 91-6.

  4. Brandao A, Fuchs SC, Gleisner AL, Marroni C, Zanotelli ML, Cantisani G. Model for the end-stage liver disease and death prediction in a cohort of Brazilian patients on the waiting list for liver transplantation. Clin Transplant 2008; 22: 651-6.

  5. Portaria GM no 1.160 de 29 de Maio de 2006.

  6. Bambha KM, Biggins SW. Inequities of the Model for End- Stage Liver Disease: an examination of current components and future additions. Curr Opin Organ Transplant 2008; 13: 227-33.

  7. Myers RP, Shaheen AA, Aspinall AI, Quinn RR, Burak KW. Gender, renal function, and outcomes on the liver transplant waiting list: assessment of revised MELD including estimated glomerular filtration rate. J Hepatol 2011; 54: 462-70.

  8. Mindikoglu AL, Regev A, Seliger SL, Magder LS. Gender disparity in liver transplant waiting-list mortality: the importance of kidney function. Liver Transpl 2010; 16: 1147-57.

  9. Leithead JA, MacKenzie SM, Ferguson JW, Hayes PC. Is estimated glomerular filtration rate superior to serum creatinine in predicting mortality on the waiting list for liver transplantation? Transpl Int 2011; 24: 482-8.

  10. Moylan CA, Brady CW, Johnson JL, Smith AD, Tuttle- Newhall JE, Muir AJ. Disparities in liver transplantation before and after introduction of the MELD score. JAMA 2008; 300: 2371-8.

  11. Cholongitas E, Marelli L, Kerry A, Goodier DW, Nair D, Thomas M, Patch D, et al. Female liver transplant recipients with the same GFR as male recipients have lower MELD scores—a systematic bias. Am J Transplant 2007; 7: 685-92.

  12. United Network for Organ Sharing. UNOS. Virginia2011 [October 4, 2011]; Available from: http://www.unos.org.

  13. Hanley JA, McNeil BJ. A method of comparing the areas under receiver operating characteristic curves derived from the same cases. Radiology 1983; 148: 839-43.

  14. Huo SC, Huo TI, Lin HC, Chi CW, Lee PC, Tseng FW, Lee SD. Is the corrected-creatinine model for end-stage liver disease a feasible strategy to adjust gender difference in organ allocation for liver transplantation? Transplantation 2007; 84: 1406-12.

  15. Caregaro L, Menon F, Angeli P, Amodio P, Merkel C, Bortoluzzi A, Alberino F, et al. Limitations of serum creatinine level and creatinine clearance as filtration markers in cirrhosis. Arch Intern Med 1994; 154: 201-5.

  16. Sherman DS, Fish DN, Teitelbaum I. Assessing renal function in cirrhotic patients: problems and pitfalls. Am J Kidney Dis 2003; 41: 269-78.

  17. Francoz C, Glotz D, Moreau R, Durand F. The evaluation of renal function and disease in patients with cirrhosis. J Hepatol 2010; 52: 605-13.

  18. Gonwa TA, Jennings L, Mai ML, Stark PC, Levey AS, Klintmalm GB. Estimation of glomerular filtration rates before and after orthotopic liver transplantation: evaluation of current equations. Liver Transpl 2004; 10: 301-9.

  19. Cholongitas E, Marelli L, Kerry A, Senzolo M, Goodier DW, Nair D, Thomas M, et al. Different methods of creatinine measurement significantly affect MELD scores. Liver Transpl 2007; 13: 523-9.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com