Different Score Systems to Predict Mortality in Living Donor Liver Transplantation: Which Is the Winner? The Experience of an Egyptian Center for Living Donor Liver Transplantation

Combining Donor and Recipient Age With Preoperative MELD and UKELD Scores for Predicting Survival After Liver Transplantation

OBJECTIVES

The end-stage liver disease scoring systems MELD, UKELD, and D-MELD (donor age × MELD) have had mediocre results for survival assessment after orthotopic liver transplant. Here, we introduced new indices based on preoperative MELD and UKELDscores and assessed their predictive ability on survival posttransplant.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We included 1017 deceased donor orthotopic liver transplants that were performed between 2008 (the year UKELD was introduced) and 2019. Donor and recipient characteristics, liver disease scores, transplant characteristics, and outcomes were collected for analyses. D-MELD, D-UKELD (donor age × UKELD),DR-MELD[(donor age + recipient age) × MELD], and DR-UKELD [(donor age + recipient age) × UKELD] were calculated.

RESULTS

No score had predictive value for graft survival. For patient survival,DR-MELD and DR-UKELD provided the best results but with low accuracy. The highest accuracy was observed at 1 year posttransplant (areas under the curve of 0.598 [95% CI, 0.529-0.667] and 0.609 [95% CI, 0.549-0.67]forDR-MELDandDR-UKELD). Addition of donor and recipient age significantly improved the predictive abilities of MELD and UKELD for patient survival, but addition of donor age alone did not. For 1-year mortality (using receiver operating characteristic curves), optimal cut-off points were DR-MELD>2345 and DR-UKELD>5908. Recipients with DR-MELD >2345 (P < .001) and DR-UKELD >5908 (P = .002) had worse patient survival within the first year, but only DR-MELD >2345 remained significant after multivariable analysis (P = .007).

CONCLUSIONS

DR-MELD and DR-UKELD scores provided the best, albeit mediocre, predictive ability among the 6 tested models, especially at 1 year after posttransplant, although only for patient but not for graft survival. A DR-MELD >2345 was considered to be an additional independent risk factor for worse recipient survival within the first postoperative year.

Total tumour volume as a prognostic factor in patients with resectable colorectal cancer liver metastases

Background

Although total tumour volume (TTV) may have prognostic value for hepatic resection in certain solid cancers, its importance in colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) remains unexplored. This study investigated its prognostic value in patients with resectable CRLM.

Method

This was a retrospective review of patients who underwent hepatic resection for CRLM between 2008 and 2017 in a single institution. TTV was measured from CT images using three‐dimensional construction software; cut‐off values were determined using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analyses. Potential prognostic factors, overall survival (OS) and recurrence‐free survival (RFS) were determined using multivariable and Kaplan–Meier analyses.

Results

Some 94 patients were included. TTV cut‐off values for OS and RFS were 100 and 10 ml respectively. Right colonic primary tumours, primary lymph node metastasis and bilobar liver metastasis were included in the multivariable analysis of OS; a TTV of 100 ml or above was independently associated with poorer OS (hazard ratio (HR) 6·34, 95 per cent c.i. 2·08 to 17·90; P = 0·002). Right colonic primary tumours and primary lymph node metastasis were included in the RFS analysis; a TTV of 10 ml or more independently predicted poorer RFS (HR 1·90, 1·12 to 3·57; P = 0·017). The 5‐year OS rate for a TTV of 100 ml or more was 41 per cent, compared with 67 per cent for a TTV below 100 ml (P = 0·006). Corresponding RFS rates with TTV of 10 ml or more, or less than 10 ml, were 14 and 58 per cent respectively (P = 0·009). A TTV of at least 100 ml conferred a higher rate of unresectable initial recurrences (12 of 15, 80 per cent) after initial hepatic resection.

Conclusion

TTV was associated with RFS and OS after initial hepatic resection for CRLM; TTV of 100 ml or above was associated with a higher rate of unresectable recurrence.

Predictors of early recipient mortality after living donor liver transplantation in a tertiary care center in Egypt

BACKGROUND

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has evolved into a widely accepted therapeutic option. Many different risk factors may affect early mortality after LDLT.

OBJECTIVES

Analyze risk factors that can affect early (<6 months) mortality of patients after LDLT in a single center.

DESIGN

Retrospective chart review of patients who underwent LDLT.

SETTING

University hospital.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Adult cirrhotic patients who underwent LDLT were classified by early (first 6 months) or late mortality. A full pre, intra- and post-operative evaluation had been done on all patients including a full history, examination and investigations to identify risk factors that might affect mortality post-LDLT.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Determination of pre-, intra- or postoperative factors that might affect recipient mortality post-LDLT.

SAMPLE SIZE

123.

RESULTS

Pre-operative factors that increased early mortality in a univariate analysis were higher model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) scores, lower graft-recipient weigh ratio (GRWR), older donor age, and recurrent spontaneous bacterial peritonitis. Intraoperative factors included more transfusion units of blood, plasma, platelets and cryoprecipitate, a longer time for cold and warm ischemia, and a longer anhepatic phase among others. Postoperative factors included a longer ICU or hospital stay and abnormal postoperative laboratory data. In the final logistic regression model, the most significant factors were pre-operative GRWR, length of hospital stay, units of intraoperative blood transfusion, postoperative alanine aminotransferase, postoperative total leukocyte count, and MELD score.

CONCLUSION

LDLT outcomes might be improved by attempting to resolve clinical factors that have been identified as contributors to early post-LDLT mortality.

LIMITATIONS

More risk factors, such as those relevant to patient portal vein hemodynamics, should be included in an analysis of predictors of early mortality.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

None.

Albumin-Bilirubin Score for Predicting Post-Transplant Complications Following Adult-to-Adult Living Donor Liver Transplantation

Background

Albumin-Bilirubin (ALBI) grade has been evaluated as an objective method to assess liver function and predict postoperative complications, particularly after hepatectomy in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, ALBI grade was rarely used in evaluation in living donor liver transplantation (LDLT).

Material/Methods

Between March 2005 and November 2015, 272 consecutive patients undergoing right-lobe LDLT were enrolled in this study. According to the ALBI score used to evaluate recipients preoperatively, those patients were divided into 3 grades (I, II, and III). Demographic findings and the post-operative complication rates were collected and compared among groups.

Results

The proportions of massive blood cell transfusions were different among those 3 grades (p<0.05). The patients in grade III had a higher risk of bacterial pneumonia and early allograft dysfunction (EAD) compared to grade I (p=0.029 and p=0.038, respectively) and grade II (p=0.006 and p=0.007, respectively). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of ALBI, Child-Pugh, and MELD for predicting 30-day mortality were 0.702 (95% CI: 0.644–0.756), 0.669 (95% CI: 0.580–0.697, p=0.510, versus ALBI grade), and 0.540 (95% CI: 0.580–0.697, p=0.144, versus ALBI grade), respectively.

Conclusions

ALBI grade was a good index for predicting post-operative complications and had a predictive ability similar to those of the Child-Pugh classification and MELD score.

Is Muscle MELD a More Promising Predictor for Mortality After Living Donor Liver Transplantation?

BACKGROUND

To improve the outcome of living donor liver transplantation (LDLT), a scoring system that could predict accurately the patient and graft survival posttransplant is necessary. The aim of this study is to evaluate our previously proposed Muscle-model for end-stage liver disease (M-MELD) score and to compare it with the other available scores to find the best system that correlates with postoperative outcome after liver transplant.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the data of 199 patients who underwent LDLT from January 2010 to July 2016 and calculated the preoperative MELD, MELD Na, the product of donor age and MELD (D-MELD), M-MELD, integrated MELD, and the balance of risk (BAR) score in all patients. The area under the receiver operating characteristics curves (AUCs) of each score was computed and compared at 3-, 6-months, and 1-year after LDLT.

RESULTS

The M-MELD, D-MELD, and integrated MELD had a good discriminative performance in predicting 3-month mortality after LDLT with AUCs > 0.7, while the M-MELD was the only score that showed a good discriminative performance in predicting 6-month and 1-year mortality after LDLT with AUCs > 0.7.

CONCLUSION

Muscle-MELD score is a simple and useful predictor of patient survival after LDLT which showed a better predictive performance than other available scores.