APACHE IV is Superior to MELD Scoring System in Predicting Prognosis in Patients After Orthotopic Liver Transplantation

Overview

Journal Clin Dev Immunol

Specialty Allergy & Immunology

Date 2013 Dec 19

PMID 24348682

Citations 5

Authors

Yueyun Hu

Xianling Zhang

Yuan Liu

Jun Yan

Tiehua Li

Ailing Hu

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

This study aims to compare the efficiency of APACHE IV with that of MELD scoring system for prediction of the risk of mortality risk after orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT). A retrospective cohort study was performed based on a total of 195 patients admitted to the ICU after orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) between February 2006 and July 2009 in Guangzhou, China. APACHE IV and MELD scoring systems were used to predict the postoperative mortality after OLT. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and the Hosmer-Lemeshow C statistic were used to assess the discrimination and calibration of APACHE IV and MELD, respectively. Twenty-seven patients died during hospitalization with a mortality rate of 13.8%. The mean scores of APACHE IV and MELD were 42.32 ± 21.95 and 18.09 ± 10.55, respectively, and APACHE IV showed better discrimination than MELD; the areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve for APACHE IV and MELD were 0.937 and 0.694 (P < 0.05 for both models), which indicated that the prognostic value of APACHE IV was relatively high. Both models were well-calibrated (The Hosmer-Lemeshow C statistics were 1.568 and 6.818 for APACHE IV and MELD, resp.; P > 0.05 for both). The respective Youden indexes of APACHE IV, MELD, and combination of APACHE IV with MELD were 0.763, 0.430, and 0.545. The prognostic value of APACHE IV is high but still underestimates the overall hospital mortality, while the prognostic value of MELD is poor. The function of the APACHE IV is, thus, better than that of the MELD.

Citing Articles

Evaluation of mortality prediction using SOFA and APACHE IV tools in trauma and non-trauma patients admitted to the ICU.

Karami Niaz M, Fard Moghadam N, Aghaei A, Mardokhi S, Sobhani S Eur J Med Res. 2022; 27(1):188.

PMID: 36175991 PMC: 9522439. DOI: 10.1186/s40001-022-00822-9.

Association between the Predicted Value of APACHE IV Scores and Intensive Care Unit Mortality: A Secondary Analysis Based on EICU Dataset.

Xu Y, Chao S, Niu Y Comput Math Methods Med. 2022; 2022:9151925.

PMID: 35432584 PMC: 9007664. DOI: 10.1155/2022/9151925.

[Validation of APACHE IV score in postoperative liver transplantation in southern Brazil: a cohort study].

Filho E, Garcez A, Nedel W Braz J Anesthesiol. 2019; 69(3):279-283.

PMID: 31072607 PMC: 9391888. DOI: 10.1016/j.bjan.2018.11.010.

Comparison of APACHE IV with APACHE II, SAPS 3, MELD, MELD-Na, and CTP scores in predicting mortality after liver transplantation.

Lee H, Yoon S, Oh S, Shin J, Kim J, Jung C Sci Rep. 2017; 7(1):10884.

PMID: 28883401 PMC: 5589917. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-07797-2.

Predictive factors of short term outcome after liver transplantation: A review.

Bolondi G, Mocchegiani F, Montalti R, Nicolini D, Vivarelli M, De Pietri L World J Gastroenterol. 2016; 22(26):5936-49.

PMID: 27468188 PMC: 4948266. DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v22.i26.5936.

References

Hayashi P, Forman L, Steinberg T, Bak T, Wachs M, Kugelmas M . Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score does not predict patient or graft survival in living donor liver transplant recipients. Liver Transpl. 2003; 9(7):737-40. DOI: 10.1053/jlts.2003.50122. View

Barie P, Hydo L, FISCHER E . Utility of illness severity scoring for prediction of prolonged surgical critical care. J Trauma. 1996; 40(4):513-8; discussion 518-9. DOI: 10.1097/00005373-199604000-00002. View

Kramer A, Zimmerman J . A predictive model for the early identification of patients at risk for a prolonged intensive care unit length of stay. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2010; 10:27. PMC: 2876991. DOI: 10.1186/1472-6947-10-27. View

Yoo H, Thuluvath P . Short-term postliver transplant survival after the introduction of MELD scores for organ allocation in the United States. Liver Int. 2005; 25(3):536-41. DOI: 10.1111/j.1478-3231.2005.01011.x. View

Vincent J, Moreno R . Clinical review: scoring systems in the critically ill. Crit Care. 2010; 14(2):207. PMC: 2887099. DOI: 10.1186/cc8204. View

Vasilevskis E, Kuzniewicz M, Cason B, Lane R, Dean M, Clay T . Mortality probability model III and simplified acute physiology score II: assessing their value in predicting length of stay and comparison to APACHE IV. Chest. 2009; 136(1):89-101. PMC: 3198495. DOI: 10.1378/chest.08-2591. View

Basile-Filho A, Nicolini E, Auxiliadora-Martins M, Alkmim-Teixeira G, Martinez E, Martins-Filho O . Comparison of acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II death risk, Child-Pugh, Charlson, and model for end-stage liver disease indexes to predict early mortality after liver transplantation. Transplant Proc. 2011; 43(5):1660-4. DOI: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2010.11.029. View

Brinkman S, Bakhshi-Raiez F, Abu-Hanna A, de Jonge E, Bosman R, Peelen L . External validation of Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation IV in Dutch intensive care units and comparison with Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II and Simplified Acute Physiology Score II. J Crit Care. 2010; 26(1):105.e11-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2010.07.007. View

Zimmerman J, Kramer A, McNair D, Malila F . Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) IV: hospital mortality assessment for today's critically ill patients. Crit Care Med. 2006; 34(5):1297-310. DOI: 10.1097/01.CCM.0000215112.84523.F0. View

10.

Merion R, Schaubel D, Dykstra D, Freeman R, Port F, Wolfe R . The survival benefit of liver transplantation. Am J Transplant. 2005; 5(2):307-13. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2004.00703.x. View

11.

Gallegos-Orozco J, Vargas H . Liver transplantation: from Child to MELD. Med Clin North Am. 2009; 93(4):931-50, ix. DOI: 10.1016/j.mcna.2009.03.010. View

12.

Volk M, Hernandez J, Lok A, Marrero J . Modified Charlson comorbidity index for predicting survival after liver transplantation. Liver Transpl. 2007; 13(11):1515-20. DOI: 10.1002/lt.21172. View

13.

Nassar Jr A, Mocelin A, Nunes A, Giannini F, Brauer L, Andrade F . Caution when using prognostic models: a prospective comparison of 3 recent prognostic models. J Crit Care. 2011; 27(4):423.e1-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2011.08.016. View

14.

Wiesner R, McDiarmid S, Kamath P, Edwards E, Malinchoc M, Kremers W . MELD and PELD: application of survival models to liver allocation. Liver Transpl. 2001; 7(7):567-80. DOI: 10.1053/jlts.2001.25879. View

15.

Arabi Y, Abbasi A, Goraj R, Al-Abdulkareem A, Al Shimemeri A, Kalayoglu M . External validation of a modified model of Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II for orthotopic liver transplant patients. Crit Care. 2002; 6(3):245-50. PMC: 125314. DOI: 10.1186/cc1497. View

16.

Kastrup M, Seeling M, Barthel S, Bloch A, le Claire M, Spies C . Effects of intensivist coverage in a post-anaesthesia care unit on surgical patients' case mix and characteristics of the intensive care unit. Crit Care. 2012; 16(4):R126. PMC: 3580709. DOI: 10.1186/cc11428. View

17.

Ahmed A, Keeffe E . Current indications and contraindications for liver transplantation. Clin Liver Dis. 2007; 11(2):227-47. DOI: 10.1016/j.cld.2007.04.008. View

18.

Halpern N, Pastores S, Greenstein R . Critical care medicine in the United States 1985-2000: an analysis of bed numbers, use, and costs. Crit Care Med. 2004; 32(6):1254-9. DOI: 10.1097/01.ccm.0000128577.31689.4c. View

19.

Knaus W . APACHE 1978-2001: the development of a quality assurance system based on prognosis: milestones and personal reflections. Arch Surg. 2002; 137(1):37-41. DOI: 10.1001/archsurg.137.1.37. View