Model for End-Stage Liver Disease: End of the First Decade

Clinics in Liver Disease

Volumn 15, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 685-698

  Asrani, Sumeet K ^a   Kim, W Ray ^a  

^a MAYO CLINIC   (United States)

Author keywords

Mathematical models; MELD; Organ allocation; Prognosis; Survival; Waiting list mortality

Indexed keywords

BILIRUBIN; CREATININE; SODIUM;

END STAGE LIVER DISEASE; HUMAN; KIDNEY DYSFUNCTION; LIVER TRANSPLANTATION; MODEL FOR END-STAGE LIVER DISEASE SCORE; MORTALITY; REVIEW; SCORING SYSTEM; SODIUM BLOOD LEVEL; SURVIVAL RATE;

BILIRUBIN; BIOLOGICAL MARKERS; CREATININE; END STAGE LIVER DISEASE; FEMALE; HUMANS; INTERNATIONAL NORMALIZED RATIO; LIVER TRANSPLANTATION; MALE; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; PATIENT SELECTION; REOPERATION; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX; SEX FACTORS; SODIUM; TREATMENT OUTCOME; WAITING LISTS;

EID: 80054934572     PISSN: 10893261     EISSN: 15578224     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.cld.2011.08.009     Document Type: Review

References (83)

1. Olthoff K.M., Brown R.S., Delmonico F.L., 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(10 Suppl 2):A6-A22.
2. Freeman R.B., Wiesner R.H., Edwards E., et al. Results of the first year of the new liver allocation plan. Liver Transpl 2004, 10(1):7-15.
3. Kamath P.S., Kim W.R. The Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD). Hepatology 2007, 45(3):797-805.
4. Freeman R.B. Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) for liver allocation: a 5-year score card. Hepatology 2008, 47(3):1052-1057.
5. Lake J.R. MELD-an imperfect, but thus far the best, solution to the problem of organ allocation. J Gastrointestin Liver Dis 2008, 17(1):5-7.
6. Freeman R.B. Is waiting time a measure of access to liver transplantation? Is shorter necessarily better?. Hepatology 2007, 46(2):602-603.
7. Freeman R.B. The Model for End-stage Liver Disease comes of age. Clin Liver Dis 2007, 11(2):249-263.
8. Wiesner R., Lake J.R., Freeman R.B., et al. Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) exception guidelines. Liver Transpl 2006, 12(12 Suppl 3):S85-S87.
9. Freeman R.B., Edwards E.B. Liver transplant waiting time does not correlate with waiting list mortality: implications for liver allocation policy. Liver Transpl 2000, 6(5):543-552.
10. Assessing current policies and the potential impact of the DHHS Final Rule. In: Committee on Organ Procurement and Transplantation Policy O, Transplantation. Pa, editors. Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 1999.
11. Malinchoc M., Kamath P.S., Gordon F.D., et al. A model to predict poor survival in patients undergoing transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts. Hepatology 2000, 31:864-871.
12. Kamath P.S., Wiesner R.H., Malinchoc M., et al. A model to predict survival in patients with end-stage liver disease. Hepatology 2001, 33(2):464-470.
13. Freeman R.B., Wiesner R.H., Harper A., et al. The new liver allocation system: moving toward evidence-based transplantation policy. Liver Transpl 2002, 8(9):851-858.
14. Fink M.A., Angus P.W., Gow P.J., et al. Liver transplant recipient selection: MELD vs. clinical judgment. Liver Transpl 2005, 11(6):621-626.
15. Gish R.G. Do we need to MEND the MELD?. Liver Transpl 2007, 13(4):486-487.
16. Charlton M.R., Wall W.J., Ojo A.O., et al. Report of the first international liver transplantation society expert panel consensus conference on renal insufficiency in liver transplantation. Liver Transpl 2009, 15(11):S1-S34.
17. Eason J.D., Gonwa T.A., Davis C.L., et al. Proceedings of Consensus Conference on Simultaneous Liver Kidney Transplantation (SLK). Am J Transplant 2008, 8(11):2243-2251.
18. 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(9):1142-1148.
19. Nair S., Verma S., Thuluvath P.J. Pretransplant renal function predicts survival in patients undergoing orthotopic liver transplantation. Hepatology 2002, 35(5):1179-1185.
20. Francoz C., Glotz D., Moreau R., et al. The evaluation of renal function and disease in patients with cirrhosis. J Hepatol 2010, 52(4):605-613.
21. 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(10):1169-1177.
22. Lim Y.S., Larson T.S., Benson J.T., et al. Serum sodium, renal function, and survival of patients with end-stage liver disease. J Hepatol 2010, 52(4):523-528.
23. Cholongitas E., Marelli L., Kerry A., et al. Different methods of creatinine measurement significantly affect MELD scores. Liver Transpl 2007, 13(4):523-529.
24. Arjal R., Trotter J.F. International normalized ratio of prothrombin time in the Model for End-stage Liver Disease score: an unreliable measure. Clin Liver Dis 2009, 13(1):67-71.
25. Trotter J.F., 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(6):1624-1628.
26. 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(2):528-534.
27. 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(2):520-527.
28. Porte R.J., Lisman T., Tripodi A., et al. The International Normalized Ratio (INR) in the MELD score: problems and solutions. Am J Transplant 2010, 10(6):1349-1353.
29. Biggins S.W., Bambha K. MELD-based liver allocation: who is underserved?. Semin Liver Dis 2006, 26(3):211-220.
30. Heuman D.M., Mihas A.A., Habib A., et al. MELD-XI: a rational approach to "sickest first" liver transplantation in cirrhotic patients requiring anticoagulant therapy. Liver Transpl 2007, 13(1):30-37.
31. Marlar R.A. Determining the Model for End-stage Liver Disease with better accuracy: neutralizing the international normalized ratio pitfalls. Hepatology 2007, 46(2):295-296.
32. Leise M.D., Kim W.R., Kremers W.K., et al. A revised Model for End-stage Liver Disease optimizes prediction of mortality among patients awaiting liver transplantation. Gastroenterology 2011, 140(7):1952-1960.
33. Austin M.T., Poulose B.K., Ray W.A., et al. Model for End-stage Liver Disease: did the new liver allocation policy affect waiting list mortality?. Arch Surg 2007, 142(11):1079-1085.
34. Thuluvath P.J., Guidinger M.K., Fung J.J., et al. Liver transplantation in the United States, 1999-2008. Am J Transplant 2010, 10(4 Pt 2):1003-1019.
35. Kim H.J., Larson J.J., Lim Y.S., et al. Impact of MELD on waitlist outcome of retransplant candidates. Am J Transplant 2010, 10(12):2652-2657.
36. Freeman R.B., Harper A., Edwards E.B. Excellent liver transplant survival rates under the MELD/PELD system. Transplant Proc 2005, 37(2):585-588.
37. Kanwal F., Dulai G.S., Spiegel B.M., et al. A comparison of liver transplantation outcomes in the pre- vs. post-MELD eras. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2005, 21(2):169-177.
38. 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):941-948.
39. 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(8):849-856.
40. Palmiero H.O., Kajikawa P., Boin I.F., 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(10):4113-4115.
41. Pomfret E.A., 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(3):262-278.
42. Thuluvath P.J., Maheshwari A., Thuluvath N.P., 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(7):754-762.
43. Washburn K. Model for End Stage Liver Disease and hepatocellular carcinoma: a moving target. Transplant Rev (Orlando) 2010, 24(1):11-17.
44. 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(7):1643-1648.
45. Davis C.L. Impact of implementation of the MELD scoring system on the prevalence and incidence of chronic renal disease following liver transplantation. Liver Transpl 2006, 12(5):707-709.
46. Machicao V.I., Srinivas T.R., Hemming A.W., 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(5):754-761.
47. Davis C.L. Kidney failure in liver transplantation: it is time for action. Am J Transplant 2006, 6(11):2533-2534.
48. Gonwa T.A., McBride M.A., 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(11):2651-2659.
49. Merion R.M., Schaubel D.E., Dykstra D.M., et al. The survival benefit of liver transplantation. Am J Transplant 2005, 5(2):307-313.
50. Volk M.L., Lok A.S., Pelletier S.J., et al. Impact of the Model for End-stage Liver Disease allocation policy on the use of high-risk organs for liver transplantation. Gastroenterology 2008, 135(5):1568-1574.
51. Schaubel D.E., Sima C.S., Goodrich N.P., et al. The survival benefit of deceased donor liver transplantation as a function of candidate disease severity and donor quality. Am J Transplant 2008, 8(2):419-425.
52. Hameed B., Lake J.R. Using higher risk organs for liver transplantation: in whom and at what price?. Gastroenterology 2008, 135(5):1452-1454.
53. Brown R.S., Lake J.R. The survival impact of liver transplantation in the MELD era, and the future for organ allocation and distribution. Am J Transplant 2005, 5(2):203-204.
54. Lai J.C., Terrault N.A., 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(12):2658-2664.
55. Moylan C.A., Brady C.W., Johnson J.L., et al. Disparities in liver transplantation before and after introduction of the MELD score. JAMA 2008, 300(20):2371-2378.
56. Myers R.P., Shaheen A.A., Aspinall A.I., 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(3):462-470.
57. Cholongitas E., Thomas M., Senzolo M., et al. Gender disparity and MELD in liver transplantation. J Hepatol 2011, 55(2):500-501.
58. Cholongitas E., Marelli L., Kerry A., 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(3):685-692.
59. Leise M.D., Larson J.J., Benson J., et al. Sexism in liver transplantation? The impact of gender specific creatinine values on waitlist mortality. Hepatology 2010, 52(S1). 177.
60. Durand F., Valla D. Assessment of prognosis of cirrhosis. Semin Liver Dis 2008, 28(1):110-122.
61. 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(1):217-231.
62. Yantorno S.E., Kremers W.K., Ruf A.E., et al. MELD is superior to King's college and Clichy's criteria to assess prognosis in fulminant hepatic failure. Liver Transpl 2007, 13(6):822-828.
63. Kremers W.K., van I.M., Kim W.R., et al. MELD score as a predictor of pretransplant and posttransplant survival in OPTN/UNOS status 1 patients. Hepatology 2004, 39(3):764-769.
64. 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(6):1282-1289.
65. Northup P.G., Wanamaker R.C., Lee Y.D., et al. Model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) predicts nontransplant surgical mortality in patients with cirrhosis. Ann Surg 2005, 242(2):244-251.
66. Teh S.H., Nagorney D.M., Stevens S.R., et al. Risk factors for mortality after surgery in patients with cirrhosis. Gastroenterology 2007, 132(4):1261-1269.
67. Bambha K., Kim W.R., Kremers W., et al. Predicting survival among patients listed for liver transplantation: an assessment of serial MELD measurements. Am J Transplant 2004, 4(11):1798-1804.
68. Huo T.I., Wu J.C., Lin H.C., et al. Evaluation of the increase in Model for End-stage Liver Disease (DeltaMELD) score over time as a prognostic predictor in patients with advanced cirrhosis: risk factor analysis and comparison with initial MELD and Child-Turcotte-Pugh score. J Hepatol 2005, 42(6):826-832.
69. Kamath P.S., Kim W.R. Is the change in MELD score a better indicator of mortality than baseline MELD score?. Liver Transpl 2003, 9(1):19-21.
70. Merion R.M., Wolfe R.A., Dykstra D.M., et al. Longitudinal assessment of mortality risk among candidates for liver transplantation. Liver Transpl 2003, 9(1):12-18.
71. D'Amico G. Developing concepts on MELD: delta and cutoffs. J Hepatol 2005, 42(6):790-792.
72. Biggins S.W., Kim W.R., Terrault N.A., et al. Evidence-based incorporation of serum sodium concentration into MELD. Gastroenterology 2006, 130(6):1652-1660.
73. Biggins S.W., Rodriguez H.J., Bacchetti P., et al. Serum sodium predicts mortality in patients listed for liver transplantation. Hepatology 2005, 41(1):32-39.
74. Heuman D., Abou-assi S.G., Habib A., et al. Persistent ascites and low serum sodium identify patients with cirrhosis and low MELD scores who are at high risk for early death. Hepatology 2004, 40(4):802-810.
75. Ruf A.E., Kremers W., Chavez L.L., et al. Addition of serum sodium into the MELD score predicts waiting list mortality better than MELD alone. Liver Transpl 2005, 11(3):336-343.
76. Gines P., Guevara M. Hyponatremia in cirrhosis: pathogenesis, clinical significance, and management. Hepatology 2008, 48(3):1002-1010.
77. Gines P., Schrier R.W. Renal failure in cirrhosis. N Engl J Med 2009, 361(13):1279-1290.
78. Kim W.R., Biggins S.W., Kremers W.K., et al. Hyponatremia and mortality among patients on the liver-transplant waiting list. N Engl J Med 2008, 359(10):1018-1026.
79. Londono M.C., Cardenas A., Guevara M., et al. MELD score and serum sodium in the prediction of survival of patients with cirrhosis awaiting liver transplantation. Gut 2007, 56(9):1283-1290.
80. Biselli M., Gitto S., Gramenzi A., et al. Six score systems to evaluate candidates with advanced cirrhosis for orthotopic liver transplant: which is the winner?. Liver Transpl 2010, 16(8):964-973.
81. Wiesner R.H. Evidence-based evolution of the MELD/PELD liver allocation policy. Liver Transpl 2005, 11(3):261-263.
82. Gerbes A.L., Huber E., Gulberg V. Terlipressin for hepatorenal syndrome: continuous infusion as an alternative to I.V. bolus administration. Gastroenterology 2009, 137(3):1179. [author reply: 1179-81].
83. Sharma P., Schaubel D.E., Sima C.S., et al. Re-weighting the Model for End-stage Liver Disease score components. Gastroenterology 2008, 135(5):1575-1581.