Correlation of Health-Related Quality of Life After Liver Transplant With the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease Score | Gastrointestinal Surgery | JAMA Surgery | JAMA Network
[Skip to Navigation]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 18.204.227.34. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
1.
United Network for Organ Sharing., United Network for Organ Sharing Web site. http://www.unos.org. Accessed October 1, 2007
2.
Freeman  RB  JrWiesner  RHHarper  A  et al.  The new liver allocation system: moving toward evidence-based transplantation policy.  Liver Transpl 2002;8 (9) 851- 858PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
3.
Malinchoc  MKamath  PSGordon  FD  et al.  A model to predict poor survival in patients undergoing transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts.  Hepatology 2000;31 (4) 864- 871PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
4.
Edwards  EBHarper  AM Application of a continuous disease severity score to the OPTN liver waiting list.  Clin Transpl 2001;19- 24PubMedGoogle Scholar
5.
Freeman  RB  JrGish  RGHarper  A  et al.  Model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) exception guidelines: results and recommendations from the MELD exception study group and conference (MESSAGE) for the approval of patients who need liver transplantation with diseases not considered by the standard MELD formula.  Liver Transpl 2006;12 (12) ((suppl 3)) S128- S136Google ScholarCrossref
6.
Kanwal  FHays  RDKilbourne  AM  et al.  Are physician-derived disease severity indices associated with health-related quality of life in patients with end-stage liver disease?  Am J Gastroenterol 2004;99 (9) 1726- 1732PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
7.
Saab  SIbrahim  ABShpaner  A  et al.  MELD fails to measure quality of life in liver transplant candidates.  Liver Transpl 2005;11 (2) 218- 223PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
8.
Rodrigue  JRLisson  GLWaik  A  et al.  Does MELD predict quality of life after liver transplantation?  Transplantation 2006;82 (1) ((suppl 3)) 1016Google Scholar
9.
Karnofsky  DAAbelmann  WHCraver  LFBurchenall  JH The use of nitrogen mustards in the palliative treatment of carcinoma.  Cancer 1948;1 (4) 634- 656Google ScholarCrossref
10.
Ware  JE  Jr SF-36 Health Survey: Manual and Interpretation Guide.  Boston, MA Health Institute, New England Medical Center1997;
11.
Beck  ATSteer  RA Beck Anxiety Inventory Manual.  San Antonio, TX Psychological Corp1993;
12.
Radloff  LS The CES-D Scale: a self-report depression scale for research in the general population.  Appl Psychol Meas 1977;1 (3) 385- 401Google ScholarCrossref
13.
Revicki  DALeidy  NK Quality of Life Assessment in Clinical Trials: Methods and Practice.  Oxford, England Oxford University Press1998;
14.
Herrell  FE  Jr Regression Modeling Strategies With Applications to Linear Models, Regression, and Survival Analysis.  New York, NY Springer2001;
15.
Jöreskog  KGSörbom  D LISREL VI: Analysis of Linear Structural Relationships by Maximum Likelihood, Instrumental Variables, and Least Squared Methods.  Mooresville, IN Scientific Software1984;
16.
Sainz-Barriga  MBaccarani  UScudeller  L  et al.  Quality-of-life assessment before and after liver transplantation.  Transplant Proc 2005;37 (6) 2601- 2604PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
17.
Moore  DFeurer  ISperoff  T  et al.  Survival and quality of life after organ transplantation in veterans and nonveterans.  Am J Surg 2003;186 (5) 476- 480PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
18.
Pinson  CWFeurer  IDPayne  JL  et al.  Health-related quality of life after different types of solid organ transplantation.  Ann Surg 2000;232 (4) 597- 607PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
19.
Butler  JMcCoin  NSFeurer  ID  et al.  Modeling the effects of functional performance and post-transplant comorbidities on health-related quality of life after heart transplantation.  J Heart Lung Transplant 2003;22 (10) 1149- 1156PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
20.
Feurer  IDWright  JKPayne  JL  et al.  Effects of hepatitis C virus infection and its recurrence after liver transplantation on functional performance and health-related quality of life.  J Gastrointest Surg 2002;6 (1) 108- 115PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
21.
Kizilisik  ATFeurer  IDVanBuren  DH  et al.  Effects of diabetes and cadaveric organs on functional performance and health-related quality of life after kidney transplantation.  Am J Surg 2003;186 (5) 535- 539PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Original Article
February 16, 2009

Correlation of Health-Related Quality of Life After Liver Transplant With the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease Score

Author Affiliations

Author Affiliations: Division of Hepatobiliary Surgery and Liver Transplantation, Department of Surgery (Drs Castaldo, Feurer, Russell, and Pinson) and Department of Biostatistics (Dr Feurer), Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee.

Arch Surg. 2009;144(2):167-172. doi:10.1001/archsurg.2008.563
Abstract

Objective  To determine whether a correlation exists between the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) after liver transplant (LT).

Design  Prospective cohort.

Setting  University hospital.

Patients  Adult LT recipients (N = 209).

Main Outcome Measures  Postoperative HRQOL over a 1-year period after LT as measured via multiple regression–based path analysis testing the effects of the MELD score, preoperative variables, and postoperative variables on scores on the physical component summary and mental component summary scales of the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey and on composite physical and mental HRQOL scores derived from multiple scales.

Results  The MELD score (β = .16), cholestatic cirrhosis (β = .12), autoimmune/metabolic disease (β = .18), neoplasm (β = .23), time after LT (β = .16), and the Karnofsky score (β = .49) had significant effects on the physical component summary scale score. Autoimmune/metabolic disease (β = .16) and the Karnofsky score (β = .25) had significant effects on the mental component summary scale score. The MELD score (β = .15), high school education (β = .15), college education (β = .17), autoimmune/metabolic disease (β = .15), neoplasm (β = .23), time after LT (β = .11), and the Karnofsky score (β = .51) had significant effects on the composite physical HRQOL score. Autoimmune/metabolic disease (β = .23), neoplasm (β = .15), and the Karnofsky score (β = .42) had significant effects on the composite mental HRQOL score.

Conclusions  An increasing MELD score, when computed without any diagnosis-based exception points, was associated with improved physical HRQOL in the first year after LT. The MELD score did not affect mental HRQOL.

×