nach oben

Hepatology International

Erschienen in:

01.07.2015 | Review Article

Model for end-stage liver disease score and MELD exceptions: 15 years later

verfasst von: Sumeet K. Asrani, Patrick S. Kamath

Erschienen in: Hepatology International | Ausgabe 3/2015

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

The model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score has been used as an objective scale of disease severity for management of patients with end-stage liver disease; it currently serves as the basis of an urgency-based organ-allocation policy in several countries. Implementation of the MELD score led to a reduction in waiting-list registration and waiting-list mortality and an increase in the number of deceased-donor transplants without adversely affecting long-term outcomes after liver transplantation (LT). The MELD score has been used for management of non-transplant patients with chronic liver disease. MELD exceptions serve as a mechanism to advance the needs of subsets of patients with liver disease not adequately addressed by MELD-based organ allocation. Several models have been proposed to refine and improve the MELD score as the environment within which it operates continues to evolve toward transplantation for sicker patients. The MELD score continues to serve and be used as a template to improve upon as an objective gauge of disease severity and as a metric enabling optimization of allocation of scarce donor organs for LT.

Malinchoc M, Kamath PS, Gordon FD, et al. A model to predict poor survival in patients undergoing transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts. Hepatology. 2000;31:864–871PubMedCrossRef

Freeman RB Jr, Edwards EB. Liver transplant waiting time does not correlate with waiting list mortality: implications for liver allocation policy. Liver Transpl 2000;6:543–552PubMedCrossRef

Freeman RB Jr. Is waiting time a measure of access to liver transplantation? Is shorter necessarily better? Hepatology 2007;46:602–603PubMedCrossRef

Freeman RB Jr. The model for end-stage liver disease comes of age. Clin Liver Dis 2007;11:249–263PubMedCrossRef

Wiesner R, Lake JR, Freeman RB, et al. Model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) exception guidelines. Liver Transpl 2006;12:S85–S87PubMedCrossRef

National Research Council. Organ procurement and transplantation: assessing current policies and the potential impact of the DHHS final rule. Washington: The National Academies Press; 1999

Kamath PS, Wiesner RH, Malinchoc M, et al. A model to predict survival in patients with end-stage liver disease. Hepatology 2001;33:464–470PubMedCrossRef

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

Freeman RB Jr, Wiesner RH, Harper A, et al. The new liver allocation system: moving toward evidence-based transplantation policy. Liver Transpl 2002;8:851–858PubMedCrossRef

10.

Olthoff KM, Brown RS Jr, Delmonico FL, et al. Summary report of a national conference: evolving concepts in liver allocation in the MELD and PELD era. December 8, 2003, Washington, DC, USA. Liver Transpl 2004;10:A6–A22PubMedCrossRef

11.

Freeman RB, Wiesner RH, Edwards E, et al. Results of the first year of the new liver allocation plan. Liver Transpl 2004;10:7–15PubMedCrossRef

12.

Austin MT, Poulose BK, Ray WA, et al. Model for end-stage liver disease: did the new liver allocation policy affect waiting list mortality? Arch Surg 2007;142:1079–1085PubMedCrossRef

13.

Lim YS, Larson TS, Benson JT, et al. Serum sodium, renal function, and survival of patients with end-stage liver disease. J Hepatol 2010;52:523–528PubMedCrossRef

14.

Freeman RB, Harper A, Edwards EB. Excellent liver transplant survival rates under the MELD/PELD system. Transplant Proc 2005;37:585–588PubMedCrossRef

15.

Kanwal F, Dulai GS, Spiegel BM, et al. A comparison of liver transplantation outcomes in the pre- vs. post-MELD eras. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2005;21:169–177PubMedCrossRef

16.

Thuluvath PJ, Guidinger MK, Fung JJ, et al. Liver transplantation in the United States, 1999–2008. Am J Transplant 2010;10:1003–1019PubMedCrossRef

17.

Kim HJ, Larson JJ, Lim YS, et al. Impact of MELD on waitlist outcome of retransplant candidates. Am J Transplant 2010;10:2652–2657PubMedCrossRef

18.

Benckert C, Quante M, Thelen A, et al. Impact of the MELD allocation after its implementation in liver transplantation. Scand J Gastroenterol 2011;46(7–8):941–948PubMedCrossRef

19.

Nagler E, Van Vlierberghe H, Colle I, et al. Impact of MELD on short-term and long-term outcome following liver transplantation: a European perspective. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2005;17:849–856PubMedCrossRef

20.

Palmiero HO, Kajikawa P, Boin IF, et al. Liver recipient survival rate before and after model for end-stage liver disease implementation and use of donor risk index. Transplant Proc 2010;42:4113–4115PubMedCrossRef

21.

Mattos AZ, Mattos AA, Sacco FK, et al. Analysis of the survival of cirrhotic patients enlisted for liver transplantation in the pre- and post-meld era in southern Brazil. Arq Gastroenterol 2014;51:46–52PubMedCrossRef

22.

Quante M, Benckert C, Thelen A, et al. Experience since MELD implementation: How does the new system deliver? Int J Hepatol 2012;2012:264015. doi:10.1155/2012/264015

23.

D’Amico G, Garcia-Tsao G, Pagliaro L. Natural history and prognostic indicators of survival in cirrhosis: a systematic review of 118 studies. J Hepatol 2006;44:217–231PubMedCrossRef

24.

Yantorno SE, Kremers WK, Ruf AE, et al. MELD is superior to King’s college and Clichy’s criteria to assess prognosis in fulminant hepatic failure. Liver Transpl 2007;13:822–828PubMedCrossRef

25.

Kremers WK, van IJperen M, Kim WR, et al. MELD score as a predictor of pretransplant and posttransplant survival in OPTN/UNOS status 1 patients. Hepatology 2004;39:764–769PubMedCrossRef

26.

Alessandria C, Ozdogan O, Guevara M, et al. MELD score and clinical type predict prognosis in hepatorenal syndrome: relevance to liver transplantation. Hepatology 2005;41:1282–1289PubMedCrossRef

27.

Northup PG, Wanamaker RC, Lee YD, et al. Model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) predicts nontransplant surgical mortality in patients with cirrhosis. Ann Surg 2005;242:244–251PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

28.

Teh SH, Nagorney DM, Stevens SR, et al. Risk factors for mortality after surgery in patients with cirrhosis. Gastroenterology 2007;132:1261–1269

29.

Dunn W, Jamil LH, Brown LS, et al. MELD accurately predicts mortality in patients with alcoholic hepatitis. Hepatology 2005;41:353–358PubMedCrossRef

30.

Kim MS, Kato TS, Farr M, et al. Hepatic dysfunction in ambulatory patients with heart failure: application of the MELD scoring system for outcome prediction. J Am Coll Cardiol 2013;61:2253–2261PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

31.

Deo SV, Daly RC, Altarabsheh SE, et al. Predictive value of the model for end-stage liver disease score in patients undergoing left ventricular assist device implantation. ASAIO J 2013;59:57–62PubMedCrossRef

32.

Fink MA, Angus PW, Gow PJ, et al. Liver transplant recipient selection: MELD vs. clinical judgment. Liver Transpl 2005;11:621–626PubMedCrossRef

33.

Gish RG. Do we need to MEND the MELD? Liver Transpl 2007;13:486–487PubMedCrossRef

34.

Charlton MR, Wall WJ, Ojo AO, et al. Report of the first international liver transplantation society expert panel consensus conference on renal insufficiency in liver transplantation. Liver Transpl 2009;15:S1–S34PubMedCrossRef

35.

Eason JD, Gonwa TA, Davis CL, et al. Proceedings of consensus conference on simultaneous liver kidney transplantation (SLK). Am J Transplant 2008;8:2243–2251PubMedCrossRef

36.

Sharma P, Welch K, Eikstadt R, et al. Renal outcomes after liver transplantation in the model for end-stage liver disease era. Liver Transpl 2009;15:1142–1148PubMedCrossRef

37.

Nair S, Verma S, Thuluvath PJ. Pretransplant renal function predicts survival in patients undergoing orthotopic liver transplantation. Hepatology 2002;35:1179–1185PubMedCrossRef

38.

Francoz C, Glotz D, Moreau R, et al. The evaluation of renal function and disease in patients with cirrhosis. J Hepatol 2010;52:605–613PubMedCrossRef

39.

Francoz C, Prie D, Abdelrazek W, et al. Inaccuracies of creatinine and creatinine-based equations in candidates for liver transplantation with low creatinine: impact on the model for end-stage liver disease score. Liver Transpl 2010;16:1169–1177PubMedCrossRef

40.

Cholongitas E, Marelli L, Kerry A, et al. Different methods of creatinine measurement significantly affect MELD scores. Liver Transpl 2007;13:523–529PubMedCrossRef

41.

Arjal R, Trotter JF. International normalized ratio of prothrombin time in the model for end-stage liver disease score: an unreliable measure. Clin Liver Dis 2009;13:67–71PubMedCrossRef

42.

Trotter JF, Olson J, Lefkowitz J, et al. Changes in international normalized ratio (INR) and model for endstage liver disease (MELD) based on selection of clinical laboratory. Am J Transplant 2007;7:1624–1628PubMedCrossRef

43.

Bellest L, Eschwege V, Poupon R, et al. A modified international normalized ratio as an effective way of prothrombin time standardization in hepatology. Hepatology 2007;46:528–534PubMedCrossRef

44.

Tripodi A, Chantarangkul V, Primignani M, et al. The international normalized ratio calibrated for cirrhosis (INR(liver)) normalizes prothrombin time results for model for end-stage liver disease calculation. Hepatology 2007;46:520–527PubMedCrossRef

45.

Porte RJ, Lisman T, Tripodi A, et al. The international normalized ratio (INR) in the MELD score: problems and solutions. Am J Transplant 2010;10:1349–1353PubMedCrossRef

46.

Biggins SW, Bambha K. MELD-based liver allocation: Who is underserved? Semin Liver Dis 2006;26:211–220PubMedCrossRef

47.

Heuman DM, Mihas AA, Habib A, et al. MELD-XI: a rational approach to “sickest first” liver transplantation in cirrhotic patients requiring anticoagulant therapy. Liver Transpl 2007;13:30–37PubMedCrossRef

48.

Marlar RA. Determining the model for end-stage liver disease with better accuracy: neutralizing the international normalized ratio pitfalls. Hepatology 2007;46:295–296PubMedCrossRef

49.

Kim WR, Stock PG, Smith JM, et al. OPTN/SRTR 2011 annual data report: liver. Am J Transplant 2013;13(Suppl 1):73–102PubMedCrossRef

50.

Davis CL. Kidney failure in liver transplantation: it is time for action. Am J Transplant 2006;6:2533–2534PubMedCrossRef

51.

Gonwa TA, McBride MA, Anderson K, et al. Continued influence of preoperative renal function on outcome of orthotopic liver transplant (OLTX) in the US: where will MELD lead us? Am J Transplant 2006;6:2651–2659PubMedCrossRef

52.

Volk ML, Reichert HA, Lok AS, et al. Variation in organ quality between liver transplant centers. Am J Transplant 2011;11:958–964PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

53.

Gentry SE, Massie AB, Cheek SW, et al. Addressing geographic disparities in liver transplantation through redistricting. Am J Transplant 2013;13:2052–2058PubMedCrossRef

54.

Asrani SK, Kim WR, Edwards EB, et al. Impact of the center on graft failure after liver transplantation. Liver Transpl 2013;19:957–964PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

55.

Sharma P, Schaubel DE, Gong Q, et al. End-stage liver disease candidates at the highest model for end-stage liver disease scores have higher wait-list mortality than status-1A candidates. Hepatology 2012;55:192–198PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

56.

Axelrod DA, Dzebisashvili N, Lentine K, et al. Assessing variation in the costs of care among patients awaiting liver transplantation. Am J Transplant 2014;14:70–78PubMedCrossRef

57.

Davis CL. Impact of implementation of the MELD scoring system on the prevalence and incidence of chronic renal disease following liver transplantation. Liver Transpl 2006;12:707–709PubMedCrossRef

58.

Machicao VI, Srinivas TR, Hemming AW, et al. Impact of implementation of the MELD scoring system on the prevalence and incidence of chronic renal disease following liver transplantation. Liver Transpl 2006;12:754–761PubMedCrossRef

59.

Sharma P, Schaubel DE, Guidinger MK, et al. Impact of MELD-based allocation on end-stage renal disease after liver transplantation. Am J Transplant 2011;11:2372–2378PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

60.

Lai JC, Terrault NA, Vittinghoff E, et al. Height contributes to the gender difference in wait-list mortality under the MELD-based liver allocation system. Am J Transplant 2010;10:2658–2664PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

61.

Moylan CA, Brady CW, Johnson JL, et al. Disparities in liver transplantation before and after introduction of the MELD score. JAMA 2008;300:2371–2378PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

62.

Myers RP, Shaheen AA, Aspinall AI, et al. Gender, renal function, and outcomes on the liver transplant waiting list: assessment of revised MELD including estimated glomerular filtration rate. J Hepatol 2011;54:462–470PubMedCrossRef

63.

Durand F, Valla D. Assessment of prognosis of cirrhosis. Semin Liver Dis 2008;28:110–122PubMedCrossRef

64.

Mathur AK, Schaubel DE, Gong Q, et al. Sex-based disparities in liver transplant rates in the United States. Am J Transplant 2011;11:1435–1443PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

65.

Allen AM, Hay JE. Review article: the management of cirrhosis in women. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2014;40:1146–1154PubMedCrossRef

66.

Pomfret EA, Washburn K, Wald C, et al. Report of a national conference on liver allocation in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma in the United States. Liver Transpl 2010;16:262–278PubMedCrossRef

67.

Thuluvath PJ, Maheshwari A, Thuluvath NP, et al. Survival after liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma in the model for end-stage liver disease and pre-model for end-stage liver disease eras and the independent impact of hepatitis C virus. Liver Transpl 2009;15:754–762PubMedCrossRef

68.

Washburn K. Model for end-stage liver disease and hepatocellular carcinoma: a moving target. Transplant Rev (Orlando) 2010;24:11–17CrossRef

69.

Washburn K, Edwards E, Harper A, et al. Hepatocellular carcinoma patients are advantaged in the current liver transplant allocation system. Am J Transplant 2010;10:1643–1648PubMedCrossRef

70.

Northup PG, Intagliata NM, Shah NL, et al. Excess mortality on the liver transplant waiting list: unintended policy consequences and model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) inflation. Hepatology 2015;61:285–291

71.

Francoz C, Belghiti J, Castaing D, et al. Model for end-stage liver disease exceptions in the context of the French model for end-stage liver disease score-based liver allocation system. Liver Transpl 2011;17:1137–1151PubMedCrossRef

72.

Goldberg DS, Batra S, Sahay S, et al. MELD exceptions for portopulmonary hypertension: current policy and future implementation. Am J Transplant 2014;14:2081–20817PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

73.

Goldberg D, French B, Thomasson A, et al. Waitlist survival of patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis in the model for end-stage liver disease era. Liver Transpl 2011;17:1355–1363PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

74.

Goldberg DS, Krok K, Batra S, et al. Impact of the hepatopulmonary syndrome MELD exception policy on outcomes of patients after liver transplantation: an analysis of the UNOS database. Gastroenterology 2014;146:1256–1265.e1PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

75.

Toso C, Dupuis-Lozeron E, Majno P, et al. A model for dropout assessment of candidates with or without hepatocellular carcinoma on a common liver transplant waiting list. Hepatology 2012;56:149–156PubMedCrossRef

76.

Massie AB, Caffo B, Gentry SE, et al. MELD exceptions and rates of waiting list outcomes. Am J Transplant 2011;11:2362–2371PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

77.

Schuetz C, Dong N, Smoot E, et al. HCC patients suffer less from geographic differences in organ availability. Am J Transplant 2013;13:2989–2995PubMedCrossRef

78.

Toso C, Mazzaferro V, Bruix J, et al. Toward a better liver graft allocation that accounts for candidates with and without hepatocellular carcinoma. Am J Transplant 2014;14:2221–2227PubMedCrossRef

79.

Freeman RB Jr. Model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) for liver allocation: a 5-year score card. Hepatology 2008;47:1052–1057PubMedCrossRef

80.

Lake JR. MELD–an imperfect, but thus far the best, solution to the problem of organ allocation. J Gastrointestin Liver Dis 2008;17:5–7PubMed

81.

Sharma P, Schaubel DE, Sima CS, et al. Re-weighting the model for end-stage liver disease score components. Gastroenterology 2008;135:1575–1581PubMedCrossRef

82.

Leise MD, Kim WR, Kremers WK, et al. A Revised model for end-stage liver disease optimizes prediction of mortality among patients awaiting liver transplantation. Gastroenterology 2011;140:1952–1990PubMedCrossRef

83.

Kim WR, Biggins SW, Kremers WK, et al. Hyponatremia and mortality among patients on the liver-transplant waiting list. N Engl J Med 2008;359:1018–1026PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

84.

Barber K, Madden S, Allen J, et al. Elective liver transplant list mortality: development of a United Kingdom end-stage liver disease score. Transplantation 2011;92:469–476PubMedCrossRef

85.

Freeman RB Jr. Variation in health care delivery: the example of exception awards in liver transplantation. Am J Transplant 2011;11:2271–2272PubMedCrossRef

Titel: Model for end-stage liver disease score and MELD exceptions: 15 years later
verfasst von: Sumeet K. Asrani
Patrick S. Kamath
Publikationsdatum: 01.07.2015
Verlag: Springer India
Erschienen in: Hepatology International / Ausgabe 3/2015
Print ISSN: 1936-0533
Elektronische ISSN: 1936-0541
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12072-015-9631-3

Leitlinien kompakt für die Innere Medizin

Mit medbee Pocketcards sicher entscheiden.

^{Seit 2022 gehört die medbee GmbH zum Springer Medizin Verlag}

Kostenlos registrieren

Neu im Fachgebiet Innere Medizin

Notfall-TEP der Hüfte ist auch bei 90-Jährigen machbar

26.04.2024 Hüft-TEP Nachrichten

Ob bei einer Notfalloperation nach Schenkelhalsfraktur eine Hemiarthroplastik oder eine totale Endoprothese (TEP) eingebaut wird, sollte nicht allein vom Alter der Patientinnen und Patienten abhängen. Auch über 90-Jährige können von der TEP profitieren.

Niedriger diastolischer Blutdruck erhöht Risiko für schwere kardiovaskuläre Komplikationen

25.04.2024 Hypotonie Nachrichten

Wenn unter einer medikamentösen Hochdrucktherapie der diastolische Blutdruck in den Keller geht, steigt das Risiko für schwere kardiovaskuläre Ereignisse: Darauf deutet eine Sekundäranalyse der SPRINT-Studie hin.

Bei schweren Reaktionen auf Insektenstiche empfiehlt sich eine spezifische Immuntherapie

25.04.2024 Allergien und Intoleranzreaktionen Nachrichten

Insektenstiche sind bei Erwachsenen die häufigsten Auslöser einer Anaphylaxie. Einen wirksamen Schutz vor schweren anaphylaktischen Reaktionen bietet die allergenspezifische Immuntherapie. Jedoch kommt sie noch viel zu selten zum Einsatz.

Therapiestart mit Blutdrucksenkern erhöht Frakturrisiko

25.04.2024 Hypertonie Nachrichten

Beginnen ältere Männer im Pflegeheim eine Antihypertensiva-Therapie, dann ist die Frakturrate in den folgenden 30 Tagen mehr als verdoppelt. Besonders häufig stürzen Demenzkranke und Männer, die erstmals Blutdrucksenker nehmen. Dafür spricht eine Analyse unter US-Veteranen.

Update Innere Medizin

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 3/2015

Comparative clinical study between the effect of fenofibrate alone and its combination with pentoxifylline on biochemical parameters and liver stiffness in patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease

Twist in hepatocellular carcinoma: pathophysiology and therapeutics

20-year survival post-liver transplant: much more is needed!

Definition of ACLF and inclusion criteria for extra-hepatic organ failure

Can hypersplenism secondary to portal hypertension be treated by non-selective beta blockers?