Cargando…
Decision making for transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic stent shunt in refractory ascites and variceal bleeding: MELD, or not MELD, that is the question
PURPOSE: The model of end-stage liver disease (MELD) score has been shown to predict 3-month prognosis following transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic stent shunt (TIPS) in liver cirrhosis; however, that score was derived from a mixed cohort, including patients with refractory ascites and variceal...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Lippincott Williams And Wilkins
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8734626/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33230020 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MEG.0000000000002009 |
_version_ | 1784628051968000000 |
---|---|
author | Pitton, Michael B. Zimmermann, Tim Mildenberger, Philipp Weinmann, Arndt Kloeckner, Roman Düber, Christoph Mittler, Jens Hoppe-Lotichius, Maria Otto, Gerd |
author_facet | Pitton, Michael B. Zimmermann, Tim Mildenberger, Philipp Weinmann, Arndt Kloeckner, Roman Düber, Christoph Mittler, Jens Hoppe-Lotichius, Maria Otto, Gerd |
author_sort | Pitton, Michael B. |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: The model of end-stage liver disease (MELD) score has been shown to predict 3-month prognosis following transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic stent shunt (TIPS) in liver cirrhosis; however, that score was derived from a mixed cohort, including patients with refractory ascites and variceal bleeding. This study re-evaluates the role of the MELD score and focuses on differences between both groups of patients. METHODS: A total of 301 patients (192 male and 109 female) received TIPS, 213 because of refractory ascites and 88 because of variceal bleeding. Univariate and multivariate Cox analyses were performed to identify predictors of mortality and area under the receiver operator characteristics (AUROC) were used to assess the prognostic capacity of the MELD score and of the results of predictors of the multivariate analyses. RESULTS: In refractory ascites, age, bilirubin and albumin were independent predictors of mortality. In variceal bleeding, emergency TIPS during ongoing bleeding, concomitant grade III ascites, history of hepatic encephalopathy, spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, bilirubin and platelet count proved significant. AUROCs of the MELD score for 3-month survival yielded 0.543 and 0.836 for refractory ascites and variceal bleeding, respectively (P < 0.001). For 1-year survival, the respective AUROCs yielded 0.533 and 0.767 (P < 0.001). In contrast to MELD, the AUROCs based on the calculated risk scores of this study resulted in 0.660 and 0.876 for 3-month survival, and 0.665 and 0.835 for 1-year survival in patients with ascites and variceal bleeding, respectively. CONCLUSION: In refractory ascites, the prognostic capability of MELD is significantly inferior compared to variceal bleeding. The results of our multivariate analyses and AUROC calculations corroborate the impact of different prognostic variables in patients undergoing TIPS for ascites and variceal bleeding. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8734626 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Lippincott Williams And Wilkins |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-87346262022-01-07 Decision making for transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic stent shunt in refractory ascites and variceal bleeding: MELD, or not MELD, that is the question Pitton, Michael B. Zimmermann, Tim Mildenberger, Philipp Weinmann, Arndt Kloeckner, Roman Düber, Christoph Mittler, Jens Hoppe-Lotichius, Maria Otto, Gerd Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol Original Study PURPOSE: The model of end-stage liver disease (MELD) score has been shown to predict 3-month prognosis following transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic stent shunt (TIPS) in liver cirrhosis; however, that score was derived from a mixed cohort, including patients with refractory ascites and variceal bleeding. This study re-evaluates the role of the MELD score and focuses on differences between both groups of patients. METHODS: A total of 301 patients (192 male and 109 female) received TIPS, 213 because of refractory ascites and 88 because of variceal bleeding. Univariate and multivariate Cox analyses were performed to identify predictors of mortality and area under the receiver operator characteristics (AUROC) were used to assess the prognostic capacity of the MELD score and of the results of predictors of the multivariate analyses. RESULTS: In refractory ascites, age, bilirubin and albumin were independent predictors of mortality. In variceal bleeding, emergency TIPS during ongoing bleeding, concomitant grade III ascites, history of hepatic encephalopathy, spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, bilirubin and platelet count proved significant. AUROCs of the MELD score for 3-month survival yielded 0.543 and 0.836 for refractory ascites and variceal bleeding, respectively (P < 0.001). For 1-year survival, the respective AUROCs yielded 0.533 and 0.767 (P < 0.001). In contrast to MELD, the AUROCs based on the calculated risk scores of this study resulted in 0.660 and 0.876 for 3-month survival, and 0.665 and 0.835 for 1-year survival in patients with ascites and variceal bleeding, respectively. CONCLUSION: In refractory ascites, the prognostic capability of MELD is significantly inferior compared to variceal bleeding. The results of our multivariate analyses and AUROC calculations corroborate the impact of different prognostic variables in patients undergoing TIPS for ascites and variceal bleeding. Lippincott Williams And Wilkins 2020-11-20 2021-12 /pmc/articles/PMC8734626/ /pubmed/33230020 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MEG.0000000000002009 Text en Copyright © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (CCBY-NC-ND) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) , where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal. |
spellingShingle | Original Study Pitton, Michael B. Zimmermann, Tim Mildenberger, Philipp Weinmann, Arndt Kloeckner, Roman Düber, Christoph Mittler, Jens Hoppe-Lotichius, Maria Otto, Gerd Decision making for transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic stent shunt in refractory ascites and variceal bleeding: MELD, or not MELD, that is the question |
title | Decision making for transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic stent shunt in refractory ascites and variceal bleeding: MELD, or not MELD, that is the question |
title_full | Decision making for transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic stent shunt in refractory ascites and variceal bleeding: MELD, or not MELD, that is the question |
title_fullStr | Decision making for transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic stent shunt in refractory ascites and variceal bleeding: MELD, or not MELD, that is the question |
title_full_unstemmed | Decision making for transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic stent shunt in refractory ascites and variceal bleeding: MELD, or not MELD, that is the question |
title_short | Decision making for transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic stent shunt in refractory ascites and variceal bleeding: MELD, or not MELD, that is the question |
title_sort | decision making for transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic stent shunt in refractory ascites and variceal bleeding: meld, or not meld, that is the question |
topic | Original Study |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8734626/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33230020 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MEG.0000000000002009 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT pittonmichaelb decisionmakingfortransjugularintrahepaticportosystemicstentshuntinrefractoryascitesandvaricealbleedingmeldornotmeldthatisthequestion AT zimmermanntim decisionmakingfortransjugularintrahepaticportosystemicstentshuntinrefractoryascitesandvaricealbleedingmeldornotmeldthatisthequestion AT mildenbergerphilipp decisionmakingfortransjugularintrahepaticportosystemicstentshuntinrefractoryascitesandvaricealbleedingmeldornotmeldthatisthequestion AT weinmannarndt decisionmakingfortransjugularintrahepaticportosystemicstentshuntinrefractoryascitesandvaricealbleedingmeldornotmeldthatisthequestion AT kloecknerroman decisionmakingfortransjugularintrahepaticportosystemicstentshuntinrefractoryascitesandvaricealbleedingmeldornotmeldthatisthequestion AT duberchristoph decisionmakingfortransjugularintrahepaticportosystemicstentshuntinrefractoryascitesandvaricealbleedingmeldornotmeldthatisthequestion AT mittlerjens decisionmakingfortransjugularintrahepaticportosystemicstentshuntinrefractoryascitesandvaricealbleedingmeldornotmeldthatisthequestion AT hoppelotichiusmaria decisionmakingfortransjugularintrahepaticportosystemicstentshuntinrefractoryascitesandvaricealbleedingmeldornotmeldthatisthequestion AT ottogerd decisionmakingfortransjugularintrahepaticportosystemicstentshuntinrefractoryascitesandvaricealbleedingmeldornotmeldthatisthequestion |