Do we need to MEND the MELD?

AIMS65 and PALBI Scores as Predictors of Six Months’ Mortality in Cirrhotic Patients with Acute Variceal Bleeding

Background & Aims:

Bleeding gastroesophageal varices are a cause of high mortality among cirrhotic patients. We aimed to investigate late mortality predictors and prognostic models using easily verified factors at admission in cirrhotic patients with acute variceal bleeding (AVB).

Methods:

Between January 2020 and June 2020, 142 patients with AVB from Tanta university hospital were included. Investigating multiple prognostic models was done using multiple logistic regression after identifying significant predictors of 6 months' mortality. Mortality prediction accuracy was assessed with area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve.

Results:

The 6 months’ overall mortality rate was 31% (44 patients had died). AIMS56, Child-Turcotte-Pugh (CTP) grade C and MELD scores were significantly higher among non survivors (p<0.001) while Platelet-albumin-bilirubin (PALBI) was significantly more negative among survivors (P=0.001). Hepatocellular carcinoma was not significantly related to the mortality (p =0.364). Univariate analysis showed that high CTP, MELD, AIMS65 and PALBI scores were predictors of mortality and associated with decreased survival with high sensitivity and low specificity; while multivariate analysis showed that only AIMS56 was independently associated with mortality (p 0.004).

Conclusion:

CTP, MELD, AIMS65 and PALBI scores are simple, bed side risk scores that can be used for the prediction of 6 months’ mortality after AVB in cirrhotic patients with high sensitivities and lower specificities.

Value of Liver Function Tests in Cirrhosis

The liver comprises both parenchymal and non-parenchymal cells with varying functions. Cirrhosis is often complicated by the development of portal hypertension and its associated complications. Hence, assessment of liver in cirrhosis should include assessment of its structural, function of both hepatic and non-hepatic tissue and haemodynamic assessment of portal hypertension. There is no single test that can evaluate all functions of liver and assess prevalence and severity of portal hypertension. Commonly available tests like serum bilirubin, liver enzymes (alanine [ALT] and aspartate aminotransferase [AST], serum alkaline phosphatase [ALP], gamma glutamyl transpeptidase [GGT]), serum albumin and prothrombin time for assessment of liver functions partly assess liver functions. quantitative liver functions like indocyanine clearance tests [ICG-K], methacetin breath test [MBT] were developed to assess dynamic status of liver but has its own limitation and availability. Imaging based assessment of liver by transient elastography, MRI based 99 mTc-coupled asialoglycoprotein mebrofenin scan help the clinician to assess liver function, functional volume of liver left after surgery and portal hypertension [PH]. Hepatic venous pressure gradient still remains the gold standard for the assessment of portal hypertension but is invasive and not available in all centres. Combinations of blood parameters in form of various indices like fibrosis score of 4 [FIB-4], Lok index, scores like model for end stage liver disease (MELD) and Child-Turcotte Pugh score are commonly used for assessing liver function in clinical practice.

Proposal of a novel MELD exception point system for hepatocellular carcinoma based on tumor characteristics and dynamics

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Patients listed with exception points for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) have been more likely to be transplanted than those listed for chronic liver failure (LF) based on the model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score. The aim of this study was to determine outcomes in the 5-year experience of a scoring system designed to reflect heterogeneity of tumor load of patients listed for HCC.

METHODS

A novel MELD exception point system based on size and number of HCC was implemented in July 2009. This system allows stratification of patients based on risk of dropping out from the waiting list according to Milan criteria. LF patients were listed according to biological MELD sodium score; HCC patients were reassigned points every three months upon repeat imaging.

RESULTS

Among 624 patients listed for liver transplant (LT), 505 were eligible. 94 (18.6%) were assigned MELD HCC points. Only 24.7% required changes in allocated points over time. Transplantation rates (HCC 83% vs. LF 73%, p=0.04) and waiting time in days (HCC 258 vs. LF 325; p=0.07) were similar. The method of competing risk analysis revealed that HCC patients were more likely to be transplanted than LF during the 5-year period preceding implementation, whereas transplant rates became equivalent for HCC and non-HCC in 2009-2014. One- and two-year survivals were similar between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study demonstrates that a novel MELD point system for HCC, taking into account dynamics in tumor size and number, allows for equitable liver allocation without compromising graft and patient survival.

LAY SUMMARY

It has historically been difficult to achieve equitable liver allocation for liver cancer and chronic liver failure with the allocation systems currently in place in many countries worldwide. We designed a new system to help improve access to organs for liver failure patients in Québec, Canada. Our 5-year experience demonstrates that this unique system renders access to transplant similar for both liver cancer and liver failure indications.

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

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.

Important predictor of mortality in patients with end-stage liver disease

Prognosis is an essential part of the baseline assessment of any disease. For predicting prognosis of end-stage liver disease, many prognostic models were proposed. Child-Pugh score has been the reference for assessing the prognosis of cirrhosis for about three decades in end-stage liver disease. Despite of several limitations, recent large systematic review showed that Child-Pugh score was still robust predictors and it's components (bilirubin, albumin and prothrombin time) were followed by Child-Pugh score. Recently, Model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score emerged as a "modern" alternative to Child-Pugh score. The MELD score has been an important role to accurately predict the severity of liver disease and effectively assess the risk of mortality. Due to several weakness of MELD score, new modified MELD scores (MELD-Na, Delta MELD) have been developed and validated. This review summarizes the current knowledge about the prognostic factors in end-stage liver disease, focusing on the role of Child-Pugh and MELD score.

Model for End-stage Liver Disease

Model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score, initially developed to predict survival following transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt was subsequently found to be accurate predictor of mortality amongst patents with end-stage liver disease. Since 2002, MELD score using 3 objective variables (serum bilirubin, serum creatinine, and institutional normalized ratio) has been used worldwide for listing and transplanting patients with end-stage liver disease allowing transplanting sicker patients first irrespective of the wait time on the list. MELD score has also been shown to be accurate predictor of survival amongst patients with alcoholic hepatitis, following variceal hemorrhage, infections in cirrhosis, after surgery in patients with cirrhosis including liver resection, trauma, and hepatorenal syndrome (HRS). Although, MELD score is closest to the ideal score, there are some limitations including its inaccuracy in predicting survival in 15-20% cases. Over the last decade, many efforts have been made to further improve and refine MELD score. Until, a better score is developed, liver allocation would continue based on the currently used MELD score.

Model for end-stage liver disease: end of the first decade

The Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) score is the basis for allocation of liver allografts for transplantation in the United States. The MELD score, as an objective scale of disease severity, is also used in the management of patients with chronic liver disease in the nontransplant setting. Several models have been proposed to improve the MELD score. The authors believe that the MELD score is, by design, continually evolving and lends itself to continued refinement and improvement to serve as a metric to optimize organ allocation in the future.

Liver transplantation: from Child to MELD

The widespread availability of transplantation in most major medical centers in the United States, together with a growing number of transplant candidates, has made it necessary for primary care providers, especially internal medicine and family practice physicians to be active in the clinical care of these patients before and after transplantation. This review provides an overview of the liver transplantation process, including indications, contraindications, time of referral to a transplant center, the current organ allocation system, and briefly touches on the expanding field of living donor liver transplantation.