BackgroundAlthough malnutrition and sarcopenia are prevalent in cirrhosis, their impact on outcomes following liver transplantation is not well documented.MethodsThe associations of nutritional status and sarcopenia with post‐transplant infections, requirement for mechanical ventilation, intensive care (ICU) and hospital stay, and 1 year mortality were assessed in 232 consecutive transplant recipients. Nutritional status and sarcopenia were assessed using the Royal Free Hospital‐Global Assessment (RFH‐GA) tool and the L3‐psoas muscle index (L3‐PMI) on CT, respectively.ResultsA wide range of RFH‐SGA and L3‐PMI were observed within similar Model for End‐stage Liver Disease (MELD) sub‐categories. Malnutrition and sarcopenia were independent predictors of all outcomes. Post‐transplant infections were associated with MELD (OR = 1.055, 95%CI = 1.002–1.11) and severe malnutrition (OR = 6.55, 95%CI = 1.99–21.5); ventilation > 24 h with MELD (OR = 1.1, 95%CI = 1.036–1.168), severe malnutrition (OR = 8.5, 95%CI = 1.48–48.87) and suboptimal donor liver (OR = 2.326, 95%CI = 1.056–5.12); ICU stay > 5 days, with age (OR = 1.054, 95%CI = 1.004–1.106), MELD (OR = 1.137, 95%CI = 1.057–1.223) and severe malnutrition (OR = 7.46, 95%CI = 1.57–35.43); hospital stay > 20 days with male sex (OR = 2.107, 95%CI = 1.004–4.419) and L3‐PMI (OR = 0.996, 95%CI = 0.994–0.999); 1 year mortality with L3‐PMI (OR = 0.996, 95%CI = 0.992–0.999). Patients at the lowest L3‐PMI receiving suboptimal grafts had longer ICU/hospital stay and higher incidence of infections.ConclusionsMalnutrition and sarcopenia are associated with early post‐liver transplant morbidity/mortality. Allocation indices do not include nutritional status and may jeopardize outcomes in nutritionally compromised individuals.
OBJECTIVES:Prognosis for patients with cirrhosis admitted to intensive care unit (ICU) is poor. ICU prognostic models are more accurate than liver-specific models. We identified predictors of mortality, developed a novel prognostic score (Royal Free Hospital (RFH) score), and tested it against established prognostic models and the yet unvalidated Chronic Liver Failure-Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (CLIF-SOFA) model.METHODS:Predictors of mortality were defined by logistic regression in a cohort of 635 consecutive patients with cirrhosis admitted to ICU (1989–2012). The RFH score was derived using a 75% training and 25% validation set. Predictive accuracy and calibration were evaluated using area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) and goodness-of-fit χ2 for the RFH score, as well as for SOFA, Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD), Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE II), and Child-Pugh. CLIF-SOFA was applied to a recent subset (2005–2012) of patients.RESULTS:In-hospital mortality was 52.3%. Mortality improved over time but with a corresponding reduction in acuity of illness on admission. Predictors of mortality in training set, which constituted the RFH score, were the following: bilirubin, international normalized ratio, lactate, alveolar arterial partial pressure oxygen gradient, urea, while variceal bleeding as indication for admission conferred lesser risk. Classification accuracy was 73.4% in training and 76.7% in validation sample and did not change significantly across different eras of admission. The AUROC for the derived model was 0.83 and the goodness-of-fit χ2 was 3.74 (P=0.88). AUROC for SOFA was 0.81, MELD was 0.79, APACHE II was 0.78, and Child-Pugh was 0.67. In 2005–2012 cohort, AUROC was: SOFA: 0.74, CLIF-SOFA: 0.75, and RFH: 0.78. Goodness-of-fit χ2 was: SOFA: 6.21 (P=0.63), CLIF-SOFA: 9.18 (P=0.33), and RFH: 2.91 (P=0.94).CONCLUSIONS:RFH score demonstrated good discriminative ability and calibration. Internal validation supports its generalizability. CLIF-SOFA did not perform better than RFH and the original SOFA. External validation of our model should be undertaken to confirm its clinical utility.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.