Schepke Michael, Roth Felix, Fimmers Rolf, Brensing Karl August, Sudhop Thomas, Schild Hans H, Sauerbruch Tilman
Department of Internal Medicine I, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany.
Am J Gastroenterol. 2003 May;98(5):1167-74. doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2003.07515.x.
Recently, new prognostic models (Model for End-Stage Liver Disease [MELD model] and Emory score) were proposed for the prediction of survival in transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) patients. Although the MELD model is considered to be superior and has consecutively been applied to priority listing for liver transplantation, these models have never been directly compared in terms of long-term prognosis. We therefore compared the prognostic accuracy of the different models, including the Child-Pugh score, in an unselected cohort of TIPS patients followed long-term.
Baseline risk scores for 162 unselected consecutive TIPS patients followed until death (n = 81), liver transplantation, or end of observation (n = 81) (mean follow-up 30.7 +/- 26.4 months) were calculated, and respective concordance- (c-)statistics for the predictive accuracy of 3-, 12-, and 36-month survival for the three models were compared statistically.
All three models predicted short-term (3-month) survival with similar accuracy. The MELD model generated the best c-statistics for both 12-month (c-statistic 0.73, 95% CI = 0.64-0.82) and 36-month survival (c-statistic 0.74, 95% CI = 0.64-0.84). The predictive accuracy of the Emory score was significantly lower (c-statistic for 12-month survival: 0.60, 95% CI = 0.52-0.68, p = 0.012 vs MELD). In the statistical comparison of the MELD and the Child-Pugh model, only a trend favoring MELD for the prediction of 1-yr survival in patients with intestinal bleeding could be observed (MELD: c-statistic 0.78, 95% CI = 0.67-0.89; Child-Pugh: c-statistic 0.67, 95% CI = 0.55-0.80, p = 0.059).
The MELD model is superior to the Emory score but only slightly superior to the Child-Pugh classification for the prediction of long-term survival in TIPS patients.
最近,有人提出了新的预后模型(终末期肝病模型[MELD模型]和埃默里评分)来预测经颈静脉肝内门体分流术(TIPS)患者的生存率。尽管MELD模型被认为更具优势,且已连续应用于肝移植优先排队名单,但这些模型在长期预后方面从未进行过直接比较。因此,我们在一个未经过筛选的长期随访的TIPS患者队列中,比较了包括Child-Pugh评分在内的不同模型的预后准确性。
计算了162例未经过筛选的连续TIPS患者的基线风险评分,这些患者随访至死亡(n = 81)、肝移植或观察结束(n = 81)(平均随访30.7±26.4个月),并对这三种模型预测3个月、12个月和36个月生存率的预测准确性的各自一致性(c-)统计量进行了统计学比较。
所有三种模型预测短期(3个月)生存率的准确性相似。MELD模型在预测12个月生存率(c统计量0.73,95%CI = 0.64 - 0.82)和36个月生存率(c统计量0.74,95%CI = 0.64 - 0.84)方面产生了最佳的c统计量。埃默里评分的预测准确性显著较低(12个月生存率的c统计量:0.60,95%CI = 0.52 - 0.68,与MELD相比p = 0.012)。在MELD模型和Child-Pugh模型的统计学比较中,仅观察到在预测肠道出血患者1年生存率方面有倾向于MELD的趋势(MELD:c统计量0.78,95%CI = 0.67 - 0.89;Child-Pugh:c统计量0.67,95%CI = 0.55 - 0.80,p = 0.059)。
对于预测TIPS患者的长期生存率,MELD模型优于埃默里评分,但仅略优于Child-Pugh分级。