RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Primary non-function (PNF) and early allograft failure (EAF) after liver transplantation (LT) seriously affect patient outcomes. In clinical practice, effective prognostic tools for early identifying recipients at high risk of PNF and EAF were urgently needed. Recently, the Model for Early Allograft Function (MEAF), PNF score by King's College (King-PNF) and Balance-and-Risk-Lactate (BAR-Lac) score were developed to assess the risks of PNF and EAF. This study aimed to externally validate and compare the prognostic performance of these three scores for predicting PNF and EAF. METHODS: A retrospective study included 720 patients with primary LT between January 2015 and December 2020. MEAF, King-PNF and BAR-Lac scores were compared using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) and the net reclassification improvement (NRI) and integrated discrimination improvement (IDI) analyses. RESULTS: Of all 720 patients, 28 (3.9%) developed PNF and 67 (9.3%) developed EAF in 3 months. The overall early allograft dysfunction (EAD) rate was 39.0%. The 3-month patient mortality was 8.6% while 1-year graft-failure-free survival was 89.2%. The median MEAF, King-PNF and BAR-Lac scores were 5.0 (3.5-6.3), -2.1 (-2.6 to -1.2), and 5.0 (2.0-11.0), respectively. For predicting PNF, MEAF and King-PNF scores had excellent area under curves (AUCs) of 0.871 and 0.891, superior to BAR-Lac (AUC = 0.830). The NRI and IDI analyses confirmed that King-PNF score had the best performance in predicting PNF while MEAF served as a better predictor of EAD. The EAF risk curve and 1-year graft-failure-free survival curve showed that King-PNF was superior to MEAF and BAR-Lac scores for stratifying the risk of EAF. CONCLUSIONS: MEAF, King-PNF and BAR-Lac were validated as practical and effective risk assessment tools of PNF. King-PNF score outperformed MEAF and BAR-Lac in predicting PNF and EAF within 6 months. BAR-Lac score had a huge advantage in the prediction for PNF without post-transplant variables. Proper use of these scores will help early identify PNF, standardize grading of EAF and reasonably select clinical endpoints in relative studies.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The efficacy of early allograft dysfunction (EAD) definitions in predicting post-transplant graft survival in a Chinese population is still unclear. METHODS: A total of 607 orthotopic liver transplants (OLT) have been included in the current study. Model accuracy was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. Risk factors for EAD was evaluated using univariable analysis and multivariable logistic regression model. RESULTS: The 3-, 6-, and 12-month patient/graft survival were 91.6%/91.4%, 91.1%/90%, and 87.5%/87.3%, respectively. MELDPOD5 had a superior discrimination of 3-month graft survival (C statistic, 0.83), compared with MEAF (C statistic, 0.77) and Olthoff criteria (C statistic, 0.72). Multivariate analysis of risk factors for EAD defined by MELDPOD5, showed that donor body mass index (P=0.001), donor risk index (P=0.006), intraoperative use of packed red blood cells (P=0.001), hypertension of recipient (P=0.004), and preoperative total bilirubin (P<0.001) were independent risk factors. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that MLEDPOD5 is a better criterion of EAD for the Chinese population, which might serve as a surrogate end-point for graft survival in clinical study.
