European journal of gastroenterology & hepatology · 2021
Applying the original model for end-stage liver disease score rather than the model for end-stage liver disease-Na score for risk stratification prior to transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt procedures.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Lee Brian T, Yang Alexander H, Urban Seth, Kim Ki-Yoon, Ter-Oganesyan Ramon, Yuan Liyun, Han Hyosun H, Khemichian Saro, Kahn Jeffrey A, Kim Brian
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: The model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score can be used to predict survival of patients undergoing transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt procedures (TIPS). The effect of hyponatremia on survival resulted in the development of the MELD-Na score. The aim of this study is to compare the prognostic value of MELD and MELD-Na scores in predicting post-TIPS outcomes.
METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed on consecutive patients with cirrhosis who underwent TIPS placement from 2012 to 2017. Indications for TIPS were either refractory ascites or variceal bleeding. Primary outcomes analyzed were death or liver transplantation. Follow-up data were censored at 1 year.
RESULTS: Eighty-three patients underwent TIPS. There was no difference in MELD or MELD-Na score between indication groups. However, the delta MELD (MELD-Na subtracted by MELD score) was higher in those with refractory ascites. There was no difference in outcomes of death or liver transplantation between the MELD and MELD-Na at 1 year. (area under the curve 0.79 vs 0.72, respectively, P = 0.119). In patients with a MELD-Na greater than 18, higher delta MELD was protective (hazard ratio 0.74, P < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: There was no prognostic difference using either score despite a higher delta MELD in those with refractory ascites. The decision to pursue TIPS should utilize the original MELD score, as the MELD-Na score alone may exclude patients with refractory ascites who may benefit from TIPS.
METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed on consecutive patients with cirrhosis who underwent TIPS placement from 2012 to 2017. Indications for TIPS were either refractory ascites or variceal bleeding. Primary outcomes analyzed were death or liver transplantation. Follow-up data were censored at 1 year.
RESULTS: Eighty-three patients underwent TIPS. There was no difference in MELD or MELD-Na score between indication groups. However, the delta MELD (MELD-Na subtracted by MELD score) was higher in those with refractory ascites. There was no difference in outcomes of death or liver transplantation between the MELD and MELD-Na at 1 year. (area under the curve 0.79 vs 0.72, respectively, P = 0.119). In patients with a MELD-Na greater than 18, higher delta MELD was protective (hazard ratio 0.74, P < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: There was no prognostic difference using either score despite a higher delta MELD in those with refractory ascites. The decision to pursue TIPS should utilize the original MELD score, as the MELD-Na score alone may exclude patients with refractory ascites who may benefit from TIPS.