Division of Gastroenterology and Comprehensive Transplant Center, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Division of Gastroenterology, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2020 Oct;52(7):1204-1213. doi: 10.1111/apt.15988. Epub 2020 Jul 29.
Mortality for patients with acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) may be underestimated by the model for end-stage liver disease-sodium (MELD-Na) score.
To assess waitlist outcomes across varying grades of ACLF among a cohort of patients listed with a MELD-Na score ≥35, and therefore having similar priority for liver transplantation.
We analysed the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) database, years 2010-2017. Waitlist outcomes were evaluated using Fine and Gray's competing risks regression.
We identified 6342 candidates at listing with a MELD-Na score ≥35, of whom 3122 had ACLF-3. Extra-hepatic organ failures were present primarily in patients with four to six organ failures. Competing risks regression revealed that candidates listed with ACLF-3 had a significantly higher risk for 90-day waitlist mortality (Sub-hazard ratio (SHR) = 1.41; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.12-1.78) relative to patients with lower ACLF grades. Subgroup analysis of ACLF-3 revealed that both the presence of three organ failures (SHR = 1.40, 95% CI 1.20-1.63) or four to six organ failures at listing (SHR = 3.01; 95% CI 2.54-3.58) was associated with increased waitlist mortality. Candidates with four to six organ failures also had the lowest likelihood of receiving liver transplantation (SHR = 0.61, 95% CI 0.54-0.68). The Share 35 rule was associated with reduced 90-day waitlist mortality among the full cohort of patients listed with ACLF-3 and MELD-Na score ≥35 (SHR = 0.59; 95% CI 0.49-0.70). However, Share 35 rule implementation was not associated with reduced waitlist mortality among patients with four to six organ failures (SHR = 0.76; 95% CI 0.58-1.02).
The MELD-Na score disadvantages patients with ACLF-3, both with and without extra-hepatic organ failures. Incorporation of organ failures into allocation policy warrants further exploration.
模型预测终末期肝病评分-钠(MELD-Na)可能低估了慢加急性肝衰竭(ACLF)患者的死亡率。
评估在 MELD-Na 评分≥35 分的患者队列中,不同 ACLF 分级患者的等待名单结局,这些患者因肝移植优先级相似而被列入名单。
我们分析了美国器官共享网络(UNOS)数据库,时间范围为 2010-2017 年。使用 Fine 和 Gray 的竞争风险回归评估等待名单的结局。
我们在列入名单时 MELD-Na 评分≥35 的 6342 名候选者中确定了 3122 名 ACLF-3 患者。肝外器官衰竭主要存在于四至六器官衰竭的患者中。竞争风险回归显示,与 ACLF 分级较低的患者相比,列入 ACLF-3 的候选者在 90 天等待名单死亡率方面的风险显著更高(亚危险比(SHR)=1.41;95%置信区间[CI]1.12-1.78)。ACLF-3 的亚组分析显示,在列入名单时存在三种器官衰竭(SHR=1.40,95%CI 1.20-1.63)或四至六器官衰竭(SHR=3.01;95%CI 2.54-3.58)均与增加的等待名单死亡率相关。四至六器官衰竭的候选者接受肝移植的可能性也最低(SHR=0.61,95%CI 0.54-0.68)。Share 35 规则与 ACLF-3 和 MELD-Na 评分≥35 分的所有患者队列的 90 天等待名单死亡率降低相关(SHR=0.59;95%CI 0.49-0.70)。然而,Share 35 规则的实施与四至六器官衰竭患者的等待名单死亡率降低无关(SHR=0.76;95%CI 0.58-1.02)。
MELD-Na 评分对 ACLF-3 患者不利,无论是否存在肝外器官衰竭。将器官衰竭纳入分配政策值得进一步探讨。