PlumX Metrics
Embed PlumX Metrics

MELD 3.0 Score for Predicting Survival in Patients with Cirrhosis After Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt Creation

Digestive Diseases and Sciences, ISSN: 1573-2568, Vol: 68, Issue: 7, Page: 3185-3192
2023
  • 6
    Citations
  • 0
    Usage
  • 5
    Captures
  • 0
    Mentions
  • 0
    Social Media
Metric Options:   Counts1 Year3 Year

Metrics Details

Article Description

Background and aims: The selection of appropriate candidates for transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) is important and challenging. To validate the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) 3.0 in predicting mortality in patients with cirrhosis after TIPS creation. Methods: A total of 855 consecutive patients with cirrhosis from December 2011 to October 2019 who underwent TIPS placement were retrospectively reviewed. The prognostic value of the MELD 3.0, MELD, MELD-Na, Child–Pugh and FIPS score was assessed using Harrell’s C concordance index (c-index). The Hosmer–Lemeshow test was used to test the goodness of fit of all models and the calibration plot was drawn. Results: The c-index of the MELD 3.0 in predicting 3-month mortality was 0.727 (0.645–0.808), which were significantly superior to the MELD (0.663 [0.565–0.761]; P = 0.015), MELD-Na (0.672 [0.577–0.768]; P = 0.008) and FIPS (0.582 [0.477–0.687]; P = 0.015). The Child–Pugh score reached c-indices of 0.754 (0.673–0.835), 0.720 (0.649–0.792), 0.705 (0.643–0.766) and 0.665 (0.614–0.716) for 3-month, 6-month, 1-year, and 2-year mortality, respectively, which seems comparable to MELD 3.0. A MELD 3.0 of 14 could be used as a cut-off point for discriminating between high- and low-risk patients. The MELD 3.0 could stratify patients with Child–Pugh grade B (log-rank P < 0.001). The Child–Pugh score could stratify patients defined as low risk by MELD 3.0 (log-rank P < 0.001). Conclusions: The MELD 3.0 was significantly superior to the MELD, MELD-Na and FIPS scores in predicting mortality in patients with cirrhosis after TIPS creation.

Bibliographic Details

Provide Feedback

Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know