Analysis of Liver Transplantation Outcome in Patients With MELD Score ≥30
Since July 2006, the liver graft allocation has been changed from the waiting time to the Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD), prioritizing the sickest patients, who have a higher risk of dying on the waiting list, and sometimes in such poor clinical condition that it compromises transplantatio...
Saved in:
Published in | Transplantation proceedings Vol. 40; no. 3; pp. 797 - 799 |
---|---|
Main Authors | , , , , , , |
Format | Journal Article Conference Proceeding |
Language | English |
Published |
New York, NY
Elsevier Inc
01.04.2008
Elsevier Science |
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get full text |
Cover
Loading…
Abstract | Since July 2006, the liver graft allocation has been changed from the waiting time to the Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD), prioritizing the sickest patients, who have a higher risk of dying on the waiting list, and sometimes in such poor clinical condition that it compromises transplantation outcomes. The aim of this study was to analyze the impact of a MELD score ≥ 30 on 30-day survival after liver transplantation (OLT). We prospectively collected the data on 178 liver transplants on 163 patients performed from March 2003 to August 2007. The subjects were divided in two groups according to their MELD scores: group 1, MELD ≥ 30 (
n = 15) and group 2, MELD < 30 (
n = 96). The groups were compared with regard to hospital and intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay, intraoperative blood products transfusion, early survival (30 days), and need for retransplantation. We excluded, patients with prioritization criteria, those receiving extra points for any special situation, and six other patients without significant data for MELD calculation (of whom only one has died after transplantation). Patients under a “special situation” were those with hepatocelular carcinoma, hepatopulmonary syndrome, and metabolic diseases, who initially received a MELD/PELD score 20, and 24, and 29. The mean MELD score at group I was 34 (range, 30 to 42), and for group II it was 16 (range, 6 to 29). Group I displayed a mean hospital length of stay of 24 days (4 to 155), with 12.60 days (ranges, 1 to 103) in the ICU versus 15.55 (range, 1 to 48) and 5.13 (range, 1 to 45) days, respectively, for group II. The need for blood component transfusions were greater in group I; 25.28% of patients in group II did not receive any transfusion during the entire inpatient period. There were nine retransplants in group II, and none in group I. The 30-day survivals were 93.3% for group I and 84.37% for group II. Besides the increased complexity of these sickest patients, there was no negative impact on early survival rates. |
---|---|
AbstractList | Since July 2006, the liver graft allocation has been changed from the waiting time to the Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD), prioritizing the sickest patients, who have a higher risk of dying on the waiting list, and sometimes in such poor clinical condition that it compromises transplantation outcomes. The aim of this study was to analyze the impact of a MELD score > or = 30 on 30-day survival after liver transplantation (OLT). We prospectively collected the data on 178 liver transplants on 163 patients performed from March 2003 to August 2007. The subjects were divided in two groups according to their MELD scores: group 1, MELD > or = 30 (n = 15) and group 2, MELD < 30 (n = 96). The groups were compared with regard to hospital and intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay, intraoperative blood products transfusion, early survival (30 days), and need for retransplantation. We excluded, patients with prioritization criteria, those receiving extra points for any special situation, and six other patients without significant data for MELD calculation (of whom only one has died after transplantation). Patients under a "special situation" were those with hepatocelular carcinoma, hepatopulmonary syndrome, and metabolic diseases, who initially received a MELD/PELD score 20, and 24, and 29. The mean MELD score at group I was 34 (range, 30 to 42), and for group II it was 16 (range, 6 to 29). Group I displayed a mean hospital length of stay of 24 days (4 to 155), with 12.60 days (ranges, 1 to 103) in the ICU versus 15.55 (range, 1 to 48) and 5.13 (range, 1 to 45) days, respectively, for group II. The need for blood component transfusions were greater in group I; 25.28% of patients in group II did not receive any transfusion during the entire inpatient period. There were nine retransplants in group II, and none in group I. The 30-day survivals were 93.3% for group I and 84.37% for group II. Besides the increased complexity of these sickest patients, there was no negative impact on early survival rates.Since July 2006, the liver graft allocation has been changed from the waiting time to the Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD), prioritizing the sickest patients, who have a higher risk of dying on the waiting list, and sometimes in such poor clinical condition that it compromises transplantation outcomes. The aim of this study was to analyze the impact of a MELD score > or = 30 on 30-day survival after liver transplantation (OLT). We prospectively collected the data on 178 liver transplants on 163 patients performed from March 2003 to August 2007. The subjects were divided in two groups according to their MELD scores: group 1, MELD > or = 30 (n = 15) and group 2, MELD < 30 (n = 96). The groups were compared with regard to hospital and intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay, intraoperative blood products transfusion, early survival (30 days), and need for retransplantation. We excluded, patients with prioritization criteria, those receiving extra points for any special situation, and six other patients without significant data for MELD calculation (of whom only one has died after transplantation). Patients under a "special situation" were those with hepatocelular carcinoma, hepatopulmonary syndrome, and metabolic diseases, who initially received a MELD/PELD score 20, and 24, and 29. The mean MELD score at group I was 34 (range, 30 to 42), and for group II it was 16 (range, 6 to 29). Group I displayed a mean hospital length of stay of 24 days (4 to 155), with 12.60 days (ranges, 1 to 103) in the ICU versus 15.55 (range, 1 to 48) and 5.13 (range, 1 to 45) days, respectively, for group II. The need for blood component transfusions were greater in group I; 25.28% of patients in group II did not receive any transfusion during the entire inpatient period. There were nine retransplants in group II, and none in group I. The 30-day survivals were 93.3% for group I and 84.37% for group II. Besides the increased complexity of these sickest patients, there was no negative impact on early survival rates. Since July 2006, the liver graft allocation has been changed from the waiting time to the Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD), prioritizing the sickest patients, who have a higher risk of dying on the waiting list, and sometimes in such poor clinical condition that it compromises transplantation outcomes. The aim of this study was to analyze the impact of a MELD score ≥ 30 on 30-day survival after liver transplantation (OLT). We prospectively collected the data on 178 liver transplants on 163 patients performed from March 2003 to August 2007. The subjects were divided in two groups according to their MELD scores: group 1, MELD ≥ 30 ( n = 15) and group 2, MELD < 30 ( n = 96). The groups were compared with regard to hospital and intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay, intraoperative blood products transfusion, early survival (30 days), and need for retransplantation. We excluded, patients with prioritization criteria, those receiving extra points for any special situation, and six other patients without significant data for MELD calculation (of whom only one has died after transplantation). Patients under a “special situation” were those with hepatocelular carcinoma, hepatopulmonary syndrome, and metabolic diseases, who initially received a MELD/PELD score 20, and 24, and 29. The mean MELD score at group I was 34 (range, 30 to 42), and for group II it was 16 (range, 6 to 29). Group I displayed a mean hospital length of stay of 24 days (4 to 155), with 12.60 days (ranges, 1 to 103) in the ICU versus 15.55 (range, 1 to 48) and 5.13 (range, 1 to 45) days, respectively, for group II. The need for blood component transfusions were greater in group I; 25.28% of patients in group II did not receive any transfusion during the entire inpatient period. There were nine retransplants in group II, and none in group I. The 30-day survivals were 93.3% for group I and 84.37% for group II. Besides the increased complexity of these sickest patients, there was no negative impact on early survival rates. Abstract Since July 2006, the liver graft allocation has been changed from the waiting time to the Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD), prioritizing the sickest patients, who have a higher risk of dying on the waiting list, and sometimes in such poor clinical condition that it compromises transplantation outcomes. The aim of this study was to analyze the impact of a MELD score ≥ 30 on 30-day survival after liver transplantation (OLT). We prospectively collected the data on 178 liver transplants on 163 patients performed from March 2003 to August 2007. The subjects were divided in two groups according to their MELD scores: group 1, MELD ≥ 30 ( n = 15) and group 2, MELD < 30 ( n = 96). The groups were compared with regard to hospital and intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay, intraoperative blood products transfusion, early survival (30 days), and need for retransplantation. We excluded, patients with prioritization criteria, those receiving extra points for any special situation, and six other patients without significant data for MELD calculation (of whom only one has died after transplantation). Patients under a “special situation” were those with hepatocelular carcinoma, hepatopulmonary syndrome, and metabolic diseases, who initially received a MELD/PELD score 20, and 24, and 29. The mean MELD score at group I was 34 (range, 30 to 42), and for group II it was 16 (range, 6 to 29). Group I displayed a mean hospital length of stay of 24 days (4 to 155), with 12.60 days (ranges, 1 to 103) in the ICU versus 15.55 (range, 1 to 48) and 5.13 (range, 1 to 45) days, respectively, for group II. The need for blood component transfusions were greater in group I; 25.28% of patients in group II did not receive any transfusion during the entire inpatient period. There were nine retransplants in group II, and none in group I. The 30-day survivals were 93.3% for group I and 84.37% for group II. Besides the increased complexity of these sickest patients, there was no negative impact on early survival rates. Since July 2006, the liver graft allocation has been changed from the waiting time to the Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD), prioritizing the sickest patients, who have a higher risk of dying on the waiting list, and sometimes in such poor clinical condition that it compromises transplantation outcomes. The aim of this study was to analyze the impact of a MELD score > or = 30 on 30-day survival after liver transplantation (OLT). We prospectively collected the data on 178 liver transplants on 163 patients performed from March 2003 to August 2007. The subjects were divided in two groups according to their MELD scores: group 1, MELD > or = 30 (n = 15) and group 2, MELD < 30 (n = 96). The groups were compared with regard to hospital and intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay, intraoperative blood products transfusion, early survival (30 days), and need for retransplantation. We excluded, patients with prioritization criteria, those receiving extra points for any special situation, and six other patients without significant data for MELD calculation (of whom only one has died after transplantation). Patients under a "special situation" were those with hepatocelular carcinoma, hepatopulmonary syndrome, and metabolic diseases, who initially received a MELD/PELD score 20, and 24, and 29. The mean MELD score at group I was 34 (range, 30 to 42), and for group II it was 16 (range, 6 to 29). Group I displayed a mean hospital length of stay of 24 days (4 to 155), with 12.60 days (ranges, 1 to 103) in the ICU versus 15.55 (range, 1 to 48) and 5.13 (range, 1 to 45) days, respectively, for group II. The need for blood component transfusions were greater in group I; 25.28% of patients in group II did not receive any transfusion during the entire inpatient period. There were nine retransplants in group II, and none in group I. The 30-day survivals were 93.3% for group I and 84.37% for group II. Besides the increased complexity of these sickest patients, there was no negative impact on early survival rates. |
Author | Ferraz-Neto, B.H. Rezende, M.B. Paes, A.T. Hidalgo, R. Meira-Filho, S.P. Afonso, R.C. Zurstrassen, M.P.V.C. |
Author_xml | – sequence: 1 givenname: B.H. surname: Ferraz-Neto fullname: Ferraz-Neto, B.H. email: ben-hur@einstein.br – sequence: 2 givenname: M.P.V.C. surname: Zurstrassen fullname: Zurstrassen, M.P.V.C. – sequence: 3 givenname: R. surname: Hidalgo fullname: Hidalgo, R. – sequence: 4 givenname: S.P. surname: Meira-Filho fullname: Meira-Filho, S.P. – sequence: 5 givenname: M.B. surname: Rezende fullname: Rezende, M.B. – sequence: 6 givenname: A.T. surname: Paes fullname: Paes, A.T. – sequence: 7 givenname: R.C. surname: Afonso fullname: Afonso, R.C. |
BackLink | http://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=20384646$$DView record in Pascal Francis https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18455020$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed |
BookMark | eNqNkttuEzEQhi3UiqYtr4AsJLjbrU_rrLlAlLYcRFCRWsSl5XhnhcNmXezdSnkEHoQX40mYkHBQpUq5ssbzz6eZ-eeQ7PWxB0KecFZyxvXJohyS6_NNih6gKQVjdclkiakHZMLrqSyEFnKPTBhTvOBSVQfkMOcFw1go-ZAc8FpVFRNsQt6f9q5b5ZBpbOks3EKi17_hnesHN4TY08tx8HEJNPT0I_5AP2T6OQxf6IeL2Tm98jEB_fn9h2THZL91XYZH2_eIfHp9cX32tphdvnl3djorfCXEUCjOnZHGNE0lal3V2L7RrWm55kLxppnrhs0d80ZIo_m0ao2vdeta5WqmKm_kEXm24eIGvo2QB7sM2UOHLUMcs9WGT03FJQofb4XjfAmNvUlh6dLK_hkfBU-3Ape961qc3If8V4eKWmmlUfd8o_Mp5pyg_Ydidu2JXdj_PbFrTyyTFlNY_PJOsQ-b1WJJ6HZDnG8QgGu9DZBs9miEhyYk8INtYtgN8-IOxnehDzj5V1hBXsQx4TVky20Wltmr9f2sz4ehR4IbhYBX9wN27eIX8brbmw |
CODEN | TRPPA8 |
CitedBy_id | crossref_primary_10_1007_s00595_013_0513_9 crossref_primary_10_1007_s00101_010_1822_7 crossref_primary_10_1097_MD_0000000000002320 crossref_primary_10_4097_kja_19108 crossref_primary_10_1111_j_1432_2277_2009_00929_x crossref_primary_10_1111_myc_12041 crossref_primary_10_1111_j_1432_2277_2009_00915_x crossref_primary_10_1007_s11377_009_0332_0 crossref_primary_10_1155_2012_264015 crossref_primary_10_1111_j_1432_2277_2010_01161_x crossref_primary_10_1590_S1807_59322011000100011 crossref_primary_10_1186_cc9068 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_transproceed_2023_03_011 crossref_primary_10_15591_mtp_2015_057 crossref_primary_10_1111_tri_12058 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_transproceed_2009_12_059 crossref_primary_10_1177_1944451612439315 crossref_primary_10_1007_s12149_009_0250_8 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_transci_2015_07_008 crossref_primary_10_4254_wjh_v9_i36_1346 crossref_primary_10_1590_S1679_45082012000100012 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_transproceed_2016_08_003 crossref_primary_10_6002_ect_2019_0077 crossref_primary_10_1177_14777509211016286 crossref_primary_10_1186_1471_2253_14_103 crossref_primary_10_1371_journal_pone_0152324 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_transproceed_2014_10_032 crossref_primary_10_4236_ojepi_2023_134019 crossref_primary_10_1111_j_1399_0012_2010_01364_x |
Cites_doi | 10.1016/j.transproceed.2005.05.007 10.1016/j.transproceed.2006.02.107 10.1111/j.1478-3231.2004.00888.x 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2006.01490.x 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2006.01702.x 10.1097/01.tp.0000238705.29588.fc 10.1111/j.1365-2036.2005.02321.x 10.1016/j.transproceed.2006.03.008 10.1016/j.transproceed.2006.10.034 10.1111/j.1478-3231.2007.01494.x 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2006.01354.x 10.1053/he.2000.5852 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2006.01242.x 10.1007/s10620-006-8011-1 |
ContentType | Journal Article Conference Proceeding |
Copyright | 2008 Elsevier Inc. Elsevier Inc. 2008 INIST-CNRS |
Copyright_xml | – notice: 2008 Elsevier Inc. – notice: Elsevier Inc. – notice: 2008 INIST-CNRS |
DBID | AAYXX CITATION IQODW CGR CUY CVF ECM EIF NPM 7X8 |
DOI | 10.1016/j.transproceed.2008.03.016 |
DatabaseName | CrossRef Pascal-Francis Medline MEDLINE MEDLINE (Ovid) MEDLINE MEDLINE PubMed MEDLINE - Academic |
DatabaseTitle | CrossRef MEDLINE Medline Complete MEDLINE with Full Text PubMed MEDLINE (Ovid) MEDLINE - Academic |
DatabaseTitleList | MEDLINE - Academic MEDLINE |
Database_xml | – sequence: 1 dbid: NPM name: PubMed url: https://proxy.k.utb.cz/login?url=http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed sourceTypes: Index Database – sequence: 2 dbid: EIF name: MEDLINE url: https://proxy.k.utb.cz/login?url=https://www.webofscience.com/wos/medline/basic-search sourceTypes: Index Database |
DeliveryMethod | fulltext_linktorsrc |
Discipline | Anatomy & Physiology Biology Pharmacy, Therapeutics, & Pharmacology |
EISSN | 1873-2623 |
EndPage | 799 |
ExternalDocumentID | 18455020 20384646 10_1016_j_transproceed_2008_03_016 S0041134508002194 1_s2_0_S0041134508002194 |
Genre | Journal Article |
GroupedDBID | --- --K --M .1- .55 .FO .GJ .~1 0R~ 123 1B1 1P~ 1~. 1~5 29Q 3O- 4.4 457 4G. 53G 5RE 5VS 7-5 71M 8P~ AABNK AAEDT AAEDW AAIKJ AAKOC AALRI AAOAW AAQFI AAQXK AATTM AAXKI AAXUO AAYWO ABBQC ABFRF ABJNI ABLJU ABMAC ABMZM ABOCM ABWVN ABXDB ACDAQ ACGFO ACIEU ACIUM ACRLP ACRPL ACVFH ADBBV ADCNI ADEZE ADMUD ADNMO AEBSH AEFWE AEIPS AEKER AENEX AEUPX AEVXI AFJKZ AFPUW AFRHN AFTJW AFXIZ AGCQF AGHFR AGQPQ AGUBO AGYEJ AIEXJ AIGII AIIUN AIKHN AITUG AJRQY AJUYK AKBMS AKRWK AKYEP ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS AMRAJ ANKPU ANZVX APXCP ASPBG AVWKF AXJTR AZFZN BKOJK BLXMC BNPGV CS3 DU5 EBS EFJIC EFKBS EJD EO8 EO9 EP2 EP3 F5P FDB FEDTE FGOYB FIRID FNPLU FYGXN G-Q GBLVA HVGLF HZ~ IHE J1W J5H K-O KOM L7B M41 MO0 N9A O-L O9- OAUVE OK- OW- OZT P-8 P-9 P2P PC. Q38 R2- ROL RPZ SCC SDF SDG SDP SEL SES SEW SPCBC SSH SSZ T5K UDS WH7 X7M XPP Y6R Z5R ZGI ZXP ~G- AACTN AFCTW AFKWA AJOXV AMFUW RIG AAIAV ABLVK ABYKQ AHPSJ AJBFU EFLBG LCYCR ZA5 AAYXX AGRNS CITATION IQODW CGR CUY CVF ECM EIF NPM 7X8 |
ID | FETCH-LOGICAL-c522t-411a9399dd52865800896f9f161241ddb6d0ba0c92396175f9c86faf4a8045c93 |
IEDL.DBID | AIKHN |
ISSN | 0041-1345 |
IngestDate | Fri Jul 11 00:58:25 EDT 2025 Thu Apr 03 07:06:24 EDT 2025 Mon Jul 21 09:17:14 EDT 2025 Thu Apr 24 22:51:09 EDT 2025 Tue Jul 01 04:19:37 EDT 2025 Fri Feb 23 02:33:26 EST 2024 Sun Feb 23 10:19:46 EST 2025 Tue Aug 26 17:18:14 EDT 2025 |
IsPeerReviewed | true |
IsScholarly | true |
Issue | 3 |
Keywords | Human Prognosis Digestive system Liver Hepatic disease Patient Homotransplantation Medicine Liver failure Score Treatment Surgery Analysis Digestive diseases Evolution Graft Models Liver transplantation |
Language | English |
License | https://www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0 CC BY 4.0 |
LinkModel | DirectLink |
MeetingName | Joint Congresses of the 10TH Transplantation Society of Brazil, 19TH Latin American and Caribbean Transplantation Society, and 6TH Luso-Brazilian Transplantation Society |
MergedId | FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c522t-411a9399dd52865800896f9f161241ddb6d0ba0c92396175f9c86faf4a8045c93 |
Notes | ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 23 |
PMID | 18455020 |
PQID | 69179513 |
PQPubID | 23479 |
PageCount | 3 |
ParticipantIDs | proquest_miscellaneous_69179513 pubmed_primary_18455020 pascalfrancis_primary_20384646 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_transproceed_2008_03_016 crossref_citationtrail_10_1016_j_transproceed_2008_03_016 elsevier_sciencedirect_doi_10_1016_j_transproceed_2008_03_016 elsevier_clinicalkeyesjournals_1_s2_0_S0041134508002194 elsevier_clinicalkey_doi_10_1016_j_transproceed_2008_03_016 |
ProviderPackageCode | CITATION AAYXX |
PublicationCentury | 2000 |
PublicationDate | 2008-04-01 |
PublicationDateYYYYMMDD | 2008-04-01 |
PublicationDate_xml | – month: 04 year: 2008 text: 2008-04-01 day: 01 |
PublicationDecade | 2000 |
PublicationPlace | New York, NY |
PublicationPlace_xml | – name: New York, NY – name: United States |
PublicationTitle | Transplantation proceedings |
PublicationTitleAlternate | Transplant Proc |
PublicationYear | 2008 |
Publisher | Elsevier Inc Elsevier Science |
Publisher_xml | – name: Elsevier Inc – name: Elsevier Science |
References | Ravaioli, Grazi, Ballardini (bib5) 2006; 6 Xu, Ling, Wu (bib8) 2007; 6 Malinchoc, Kamath, Gordon (bib2) 2000; 31 Feng, Goodrich, Bragg-Greham (bib13) 2006; 6 Sachdev, Hernandez, Sharma (bib1) 2006; 6 Avolio, Agnes, Gasbarrini (bib10) 2006; 38 Avolio, Agnes, Gasbarrini (bib9) 2006; 38 Wang, Saab (bib14) 2004; 24 Kanwal, Dulai, Spiegel (bib3) 2005; 21 Washburn, Pollock, Nichols (bib4) 2006; 6 Johnson, Alexopoulos, Curry (bib12) 2007; 7 Adler, De Gendt, Vereerstraeten (bib6) 2005; 37 Ravaioli, Grazi, Ercolani (bib7) 2006; 7 Xia, Fond, Du (bib11) 2006; 38 Wang (10.1016/j.transproceed.2008.03.016_bib14) 2004; 24 Avolio (10.1016/j.transproceed.2008.03.016_bib9) 2006; 38 Kanwal (10.1016/j.transproceed.2008.03.016_bib3) 2005; 21 Sachdev (10.1016/j.transproceed.2008.03.016_bib1) 2006; 6 Ravaioli (10.1016/j.transproceed.2008.03.016_bib7) 2006; 7 Xu (10.1016/j.transproceed.2008.03.016_bib8) 2007; 6 Xia (10.1016/j.transproceed.2008.03.016_bib11) 2006; 38 Johnson (10.1016/j.transproceed.2008.03.016_bib12) 2007; 7 Feng (10.1016/j.transproceed.2008.03.016_bib13) 2006; 6 Avolio (10.1016/j.transproceed.2008.03.016_bib10) 2006; 38 Adler (10.1016/j.transproceed.2008.03.016_bib6) 2005; 37 Malinchoc (10.1016/j.transproceed.2008.03.016_bib2) 2000; 31 Washburn (10.1016/j.transproceed.2008.03.016_bib4) 2006; 6 Ravaioli (10.1016/j.transproceed.2008.03.016_bib5) 2006; 6 |
References_xml | – volume: 6 start-page: 1572 year: 2006 ident: bib5 article-title: Liver transplantation with the MELD system: A prospective study from a single European center publication-title: Am J Transplant – volume: 37 start-page: 2863 year: 2005 ident: bib6 article-title: Value of the MELD score for the assessment of pre- and post-liver transplantation survival publication-title: Transplant Proc – volume: 38 start-page: 1398 year: 2006 ident: bib11 article-title: Ascites, but not hyponaremia, is associated with high intraoperative transfusion and vasopressor requirements during liver transplantation publication-title: Transplant Proc – volume: 6 start-page: 783 year: 2006 ident: bib13 article-title: Characteristics associated with liver graft failure: The concept of a donor risk index publication-title: Am J Transplant – volume: 24 start-page: 1 year: 2004 ident: bib14 article-title: Liver transplantation in the era of model for end-stage liver disease publication-title: Liver Int – volume: 38 start-page: 3567 year: 2006 ident: bib9 article-title: Allocation of nonstandard livers to transplant candidates with high MELD scores: should this practice be continued? publication-title: Transplant Proc – volume: 6 start-page: 1070 year: 2006 ident: bib1 article-title: Liver transplantation in the MELD era: a single center experience publication-title: Dig Dis Sci – volume: 7 start-page: 1003 year: 2007 ident: bib12 article-title: Primary nonfunction (PNF) in the MELD era: an SRTR database analysis publication-title: Am J Transplant – volume: 21 start-page: 169 year: 2005 ident: bib3 article-title: A comparison of liver transplantation outcomes in the pre- vs. post-MELD eras publication-title: Aliment Pharmacol Ther – volume: 6 start-page: 816 year: 2007 ident: bib8 article-title: A novel prognostic model based on serum levels of total bilirubin and creatinina early after liver transplantation publication-title: Liver Int – volume: 31 start-page: 864 year: 2000 ident: bib2 article-title: A model to predict poor survival in patients undergoing transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts publication-title: Hepatology – volume: 6 start-page: 2449 year: 2006 ident: bib4 article-title: Impact of recipient MELD score o resource utilization publication-title: Am J Transplant – volume: 38 start-page: 1059 year: 2006 ident: bib10 article-title: Prognostic value of MELD score and donor quality in liver transplantation: Implications for the donor recipient match publication-title: Transplant Proc – volume: 7 start-page: 987 year: 2006 ident: bib7 article-title: The future challenge in the MELD era: how to match extended-use donors and sick recipients publication-title: Transplantation – volume: 37 start-page: 2863 year: 2005 ident: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2008.03.016_bib6 article-title: Value of the MELD score for the assessment of pre- and post-liver transplantation survival publication-title: Transplant Proc doi: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2005.05.007 – volume: 38 start-page: 1398 year: 2006 ident: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2008.03.016_bib11 article-title: Ascites, but not hyponaremia, is associated with high intraoperative transfusion and vasopressor requirements during liver transplantation publication-title: Transplant Proc doi: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2006.02.107 – volume: 24 start-page: 1 year: 2004 ident: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2008.03.016_bib14 article-title: Liver transplantation in the era of model for end-stage liver disease publication-title: Liver Int doi: 10.1111/j.1478-3231.2004.00888.x – volume: 6 start-page: 2449 year: 2006 ident: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2008.03.016_bib4 article-title: Impact of recipient MELD score o resource utilization publication-title: Am J Transplant doi: 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2006.01490.x – volume: 7 start-page: 1003 year: 2007 ident: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2008.03.016_bib12 article-title: Primary nonfunction (PNF) in the MELD era: an SRTR database analysis publication-title: Am J Transplant doi: 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2006.01702.x – volume: 7 start-page: 987 year: 2006 ident: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2008.03.016_bib7 article-title: The future challenge in the MELD era: how to match extended-use donors and sick recipients publication-title: Transplantation doi: 10.1097/01.tp.0000238705.29588.fc – volume: 21 start-page: 169 year: 2005 ident: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2008.03.016_bib3 article-title: A comparison of liver transplantation outcomes in the pre- vs. post-MELD eras publication-title: Aliment Pharmacol Ther doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2036.2005.02321.x – volume: 38 start-page: 1059 year: 2006 ident: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2008.03.016_bib10 article-title: Prognostic value of MELD score and donor quality in liver transplantation: Implications for the donor recipient match publication-title: Transplant Proc doi: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2006.03.008 – volume: 38 start-page: 3567 year: 2006 ident: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2008.03.016_bib9 article-title: Allocation of nonstandard livers to transplant candidates with high MELD scores: should this practice be continued? publication-title: Transplant Proc doi: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2006.10.034 – volume: 6 start-page: 816 year: 2007 ident: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2008.03.016_bib8 article-title: A novel prognostic model based on serum levels of total bilirubin and creatinina early after liver transplantation publication-title: Liver Int doi: 10.1111/j.1478-3231.2007.01494.x – volume: 6 start-page: 1572 year: 2006 ident: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2008.03.016_bib5 article-title: Liver transplantation with the MELD system: A prospective study from a single European center publication-title: Am J Transplant doi: 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2006.01354.x – volume: 31 start-page: 864 year: 2000 ident: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2008.03.016_bib2 article-title: A model to predict poor survival in patients undergoing transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts publication-title: Hepatology doi: 10.1053/he.2000.5852 – volume: 6 start-page: 783 year: 2006 ident: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2008.03.016_bib13 article-title: Characteristics associated with liver graft failure: The concept of a donor risk index publication-title: Am J Transplant doi: 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2006.01242.x – volume: 6 start-page: 1070 year: 2006 ident: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2008.03.016_bib1 article-title: Liver transplantation in the MELD era: a single center experience publication-title: Dig Dis Sci doi: 10.1007/s10620-006-8011-1 |
SSID | ssj0004243 |
Score | 1.9675978 |
Snippet | Since July 2006, the liver graft allocation has been changed from the waiting time to the Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD), prioritizing the sickest... Abstract Since July 2006, the liver graft allocation has been changed from the waiting time to the Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD), prioritizing the... |
SourceID | proquest pubmed pascalfrancis crossref elsevier |
SourceType | Aggregation Database Index Database Enrichment Source Publisher |
StartPage | 797 |
SubjectTerms | Adolescent Adult Aged Biological and medical sciences Female Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology Fundamental immunology Gastroenterology. Liver. Pancreas. Abdomen Humans Liver Diseases - classification Liver Diseases - surgery Liver Failure - surgery Liver Transplantation - mortality Liver Transplantation - physiology Liver, biliary tract, pancreas, portal circulation, spleen Liver. Biliary tract. Portal circulation. Exocrine pancreas Male Medical sciences Middle Aged Other diseases. Semiology Portasystemic Shunt, Surgical Portasystemic Shunt, Transjugular Intrahepatic Predictive Value of Tests Surgery Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases Surgery of the digestive system Survival Analysis Time Factors Tissue, organ and graft immunology Treatment Outcome |
Title | Analysis of Liver Transplantation Outcome in Patients With MELD Score ≥30 |
URI | https://www.clinicalkey.com/#!/content/1-s2.0-S0041134508002194 https://www.clinicalkey.es/playcontent/1-s2.0-S0041134508002194 https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.transproceed.2008.03.016 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18455020 https://www.proquest.com/docview/69179513 |
Volume | 40 |
hasFullText | 1 |
inHoldings | 1 |
isFullTextHit | |
isPrint | |
link | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwpV1Lb9QwEB71ISQkVEELZQssPqCemtaxEycW4rCUVgstpRKt6M3y5iEWtdlVkz3shTs_pH-sv4RxbO9SUaSVuEVJJo_JZPw5-eYbgDeioCzjSRykAyGCKOfmJ6HOA5bIQiQ6Y5Fu1T5PRP88-nQRXyzBvq-FMbRKl_ttTm-ztVuz57y5Nx4OTY1vFIY8ilvMg3PxZVhlXAoM7dXex6P-ybw8knnyXBgYA6892tK8mlZD3A4WjlrJd6lpf37_OPVorGv0XmnbXvwbl7bj0-FjWHPAkvTstT-BpaJah41ehZPqqynZJi3Vs_2Gvg4P3vul7VMrXT3dIWfzSqx6pzWYiVpPN-DIq5eQUUmODZmDWF30S22LlyryZdKgFwsyrMipVWutybdh8518Pjj-QL4avUxy--uG06dwfnhwtt8PXCOGIEN41gToZy0RyeR5bApZ0d-pFKUsES0iAMjzgcjpQNNMGv8jHilllopSl5FOETFmkj-DlWpUFc-BhEWKmESHQiY48cNjSp5mccpkRkvJWNIB6d2uMqdSbpplXCpPR_uh_nxkro0mV7ipA3xmO7ZaHQtZvfVPV_lqVMyfCoeUhayT-6yL2qWCWoWqZoqqv8K1A-9mlncifuEzd--E4uyWGeUIKiPc4bWPTYU5w_wI0lUxmtRK4BwdkTXvwKYN2bm7UlPlzujWf17cC3hoiTWG4vQSVprrSfEK0Vsz6MLy7s-w697R38ewQ8g |
linkProvider | Elsevier |
linkToHtml | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwpV1Nb9NAEB2VIgRShaAFGj7aPaCe6na9a6-9qjiU0irQtFQiFb2tNv4QqVonws4hF-78kP4xfgmzu96EiiJF4hYlnsQZz868td-8AXgrCsoynsRBOhAiiHJuHhLqPGCJLESiMxZpq_Z5Krrn0aeL-GIJDnwvjKFVtrnf5XSbrdt3dltv7o6HQ9PjG4Uhj2KLeXAvfg_uR7h8zerc-THneUTMU-fCwBzulUctyauxCuKuVLTESr5DzfDzu6vUyljX6LvSDb34Nyq11enoCTxuYSXZd2f-FJaKahXW9ivcUl9PyRaxRE97B30VHrz3r7bOnHD1dJv0531Y9bY1mElaT9fg2GuXkFFJeobKQZwq-pV2rUsV-Txp0IcFGVbkzGm11uTrsPlGTg57H8gXo5ZJfv284fQZnB8d9g-6QTuGIcgQnDUBellLxDF5Hps2VvR2KkUpS8SKWP7zfCByOtA0Q6goEQ_FpcxSUeoy0inixUzy57BcjapiHUhYpIhIdChkgts-_E7J0yxOmcxoKRlLOiC921XWapSbURlXypPRLtWfl6wdoskVftQBPrMdO6WOhaz2_NVVvhcVs6fCgrKQdXKXdVG3iaBWoaqZouqvYO3Au5nlrXhf-Jc3boXi7C8zyhFSRnjApo9NhRnDPAbSVTGa1ErgDh1xNe_ACxeyc3elpsed0Zf_eXKb8LDbP-mp3sfT41fwyFFsDNnpNSw33yfFG8RxzWDDrtPfdfhEjA |
openUrl | ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=proceeding&rft.title=Transplantation+proceedings&rft.atitle=Analysis+of+Liver+Transplantation+Outcome+in+Patients+With+MELD+Score+%E2%89%A530&rft.au=FERRAZ-NETO%2C+B.+H&rft.au=ZURSTRASSEN%2C+M.+P.+V.+C&rft.au=HIDALGO%2C+R&rft.au=MEIRA-FILHO%2C+S.+P&rft.date=2008-04-01&rft.pub=Elsevier+Science&rft.issn=0041-1345&rft.volume=40&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=797&rft.epage=799&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016%2Fj.transproceed.2008.03.016&rft.externalDBID=n%2Fa&rft.externalDocID=20384646 |
thumbnail_m | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/image/custom?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcdn.clinicalkey.com%2Fck-thumbnails%2F00411345%2FS0041134508X00041%2Fcov150h.gif |