Transplantation · 2023
Alcohol Use in Liver Transplant Recipients With Alcohol-related Liver Disease: A Comparative Assessment of Relapse Prediction Models.
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.
Sedki Mai, Kwong Allison, Bhargava Meera, Ahmed Aijaz, Daugherty Tami, Kwo Paul, Dronamraju Deepti, Kumari Radhika, Kim W Ray, Esquivel Carlos, Melcher Marc, Bonham C Andrew, Gallo Amy, Nelson Ashly, Norwood Amanda, Hussain Filza, Goel Aparna
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The selection of liver transplant (LT) candidates with alcohol-related liver disease (ALD) is influenced by the risk of alcohol relapse (AR), yet the ability to predict AR is limited. We evaluate psychosocial factors associated with post-LT AR and compare the performance of high-risk alcoholism risk (HRAR), sustained alcohol use post-LT (SALT), and the Stanford Integrated Psychosocial Assessment for Transplantation (SIPAT) scores in predicting relapse.
METHODS: A retrospective analysis of ALD patients undergoing LT from 2015 to 2021 at a single US transplant center was performed. Risk factors associated with post-LT AR were evaluated and test characteristics of 3 prediction models were compared.
RESULTS: Of 219 ALD LT recipients, 23 (11%) had AR during a median study follow-up of 37.5 mo. On multivariate analysis, comorbid psychiatric illness (odds ratio 5.22) and continued alcohol use after advice from a health care provider (odds ratio 3.8) were found to be significantly associated with post-LT AR. On sensitivity analysis, SIPAT of 30 was optimal on discriminating between ALD LT recipients with and without post-LT AR. SIPAT outperformed both the HRAR and SALT scores (c-statistic 0.67 versus 0.59 and 0.62, respectively) in identifying post-LT AR. However, all scores had poor positive predictive value (<25%).
CONCLUSIONS: AR after LT is associated with comorbid psychiatric illness and lack of heeding health care provider advice to abstain from alcohol. Although SIPAT outperformed the HRAR and SALT scores in predicting AR, all are poor predictors. The current tools to predict post-LT AR should not be used to exclude LT candidacy.
METHODS: A retrospective analysis of ALD patients undergoing LT from 2015 to 2021 at a single US transplant center was performed. Risk factors associated with post-LT AR were evaluated and test characteristics of 3 prediction models were compared.
RESULTS: Of 219 ALD LT recipients, 23 (11%) had AR during a median study follow-up of 37.5 mo. On multivariate analysis, comorbid psychiatric illness (odds ratio 5.22) and continued alcohol use after advice from a health care provider (odds ratio 3.8) were found to be significantly associated with post-LT AR. On sensitivity analysis, SIPAT of 30 was optimal on discriminating between ALD LT recipients with and without post-LT AR. SIPAT outperformed both the HRAR and SALT scores (c-statistic 0.67 versus 0.59 and 0.62, respectively) in identifying post-LT AR. However, all scores had poor positive predictive value (<25%).
CONCLUSIONS: AR after LT is associated with comorbid psychiatric illness and lack of heeding health care provider advice to abstain from alcohol. Although SIPAT outperformed the HRAR and SALT scores in predicting AR, all are poor predictors. The current tools to predict post-LT AR should not be used to exclude LT candidacy.