![]() ![]() The comparative analysis between Groups B and D revealed the mean and median MELD scores as 11.2±5.6 and 11.6±5.7 (p=0.14), and 9 and 9 (p=0.14), respectively.Ĭonclusion: Median pretransplant MELD score was in the range of 15-16 in LDLT recipients without HCC and 9 in those with HCC. The comparative analysis between Groups A and C revealed the mean and median MELD scores as 19.0☙.4 and 17.9☘.5 (p=0.009), and 16 and 15 (p=0.077), respectively. Clinical parameters of liver cirrhosis indicate that Group A had worse general conditions than Group C and Groups B and D had similar general conditions. Results: The number of patients in Groups A, B, C and D was 615, 599, 704 and 713, respectively and their MELD scores were 19.0☙.4, 11.2±5.6, 17.9☘.5 and 11.6±5.7, respectively. Patients without and with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) were categorized as Group A and B in the pre-MELD era and Group C and D in the post-MELD era, respectively. We compared the LDLT recipient profiles by focusing on pretransplant MELD score for 4 years before and after the introduction of the MELD scorebased allocation system. Methods: This study was a retrospective double-arm analysis using a single-institution LDLT cohort. This study aimed to analyze the profiles of adult patients who underwent living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) in the pre- and post-MELD eras. Background: Model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score-based allocation system was started in 2016 in Korea.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |