» Articles » PMID: 38757050

Differential Effects of Ascites and Hepatic Encephalopathy on Waitlist Mortality in Liver Transplantation by MELD 3.0

Overview
Publisher Wolters Kluwer
Specialty General Surgery
Date 2024 May 17
PMID 38757050
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: MELD 3.0 introduces changes to address waitlist disparities for liver transplant (LT) candidates. Ascites and hepatic encephalopathy (HE) are important milestones in the natural history of cirrhosis regardless of the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score. We aim to assess the impact of ascites and HE and its interaction with MELD 3.0 on waitlist mortality.

Methods: This is a retrospective study of patients listed for LT in the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network database from 2016 to 2021. The primary outcome was waitlist mortality (death/delisting for too sick to LT). Ascites/HE were classified as moderate ascites without moderate HE (mAscites), moderate HE without moderate ascites (mHE), both moderate ascites/HE (mBoth), and neither. MELD 3.0 scores were categorized as <20, 20-29, 30-39, and ≥40.

Results: Of 39 025 candidates, 29% had mAscites, 3% mHE, and 8% mBoth. One-year waitlist mortality was 30%, 38%, and 47%, respectively, compared with 17% (all  < 0.001) for those with neither. In multivariable Cox regression, the adjusted risk of waitlist mortality associated with mAscites (versus neither) was a hazard ratio (HR) of 1.76 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.55-2.00) when the MELD 3.0 score was <20, significantly higher than when the MELD 3.0 score was 20-29 (HR 1.40; 95% CI, 1.27-1.54), 30-39 (HR 1.19; 95% CI, 1.04-1.35), and ≥40 (HR 1.14; 95% CI, 0.91-1.43, interaction  < 0.05 for all). A similar pattern was observed by MELD 3.0 for both moderate ascites/HE.

Conclusions: The presence of moderate ascites alone, or combined with moderate HE, not only increases the risk of waitlist mortality but also has a differential effect by MELD 3.0, especially at lower MELD scores. Earlier strategies addressing this group and improving treatment plans or access to LT regardless of MELD remain needed.

References
1.
Biggins S, Angeli P, Garcia-Tsao G, Gines P, Ling S, Nadim M . Diagnosis, Evaluation, and Management of Ascites, Spontaneous Bacterial Peritonitis and Hepatorenal Syndrome: 2021 Practice Guidance by the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases. Hepatology. 2021; 74(2):1014-1048. DOI: 10.1002/hep.31884. View

2.
Zipprich A, Garcia-Tsao G, Rogowski S, Fleig W, Seufferlein T, Dollinger M . Prognostic indicators of survival in patients with compensated and decompensated cirrhosis. Liver Int. 2012; 32(9):1407-14. PMC: 3713489. DOI: 10.1111/j.1478-3231.2012.02830.x. View

3.
Somsouk M, Guy J, Biggins S, Vittinghoff E, Kohn M, Inadomi J . Ascites improves upon [corrected] serum sodium plus [corrected] model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) for predicting mortality in patients with advanced liver disease. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2009; 30(7):741-8. PMC: 2742706. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2036.2009.04096.x. View

4.
Bustamante J, Rimola A, Ventura P, Navasa M, Cirera I, Reggiardo V . Prognostic significance of hepatic encephalopathy in patients with cirrhosis. J Hepatol. 1999; 30(5):890-5. DOI: 10.1016/s0168-8278(99)80144-5. View

5.
Yi Z, Mayorga M, Orman E, Wheeler S, Hayashi P, Barritt Th A . Trends in Characteristics of Patients Listed for Liver Transplantation Will Lead to Higher Rates of Waitlist Removal Due to Clinical Deterioration. Transplantation. 2017; 101(10):2368-2374. PMC: 5667556. DOI: 10.1097/TP.0000000000001851. View