ReviewJHEP reports : innovation in hepatology2019
Approaches for patients with very high MELD scores.
Review in JHEP reports : innovation in hepatology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Asian Pacific Association for the Study of the Liver clinical practice guidelines on liver transplantation.Hepatology international · 2024Guideline
- A global consensus on the critical care management of acute-on-chronic liver failure patients: the APASL ACLF Beijing Position Paper.Hepatology international · 2026Article
- Steatotic liver disease and liver transplantation: Candidate selection and post-transplant management.JHEP reports : innovation in hepatology · 2026Review
- Fecal microbiota transplant and its usefulness in hepatic disorders: a systematic review.Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2026Review
- Development and validation of an explainable machine learning model for predicting multidimensional frailty in hospitalized patients with cirrhosis.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2024Article
- Acute decompensation of cirrhosis versus acute-on-chronic liver failure: What are the clinical implications?United European gastroenterology journal · 2024Review
- Predictors for postoperative dysphagia in liver transplant recipients.Frontiers in transplantation · 2024Article
- Body composition and short-term mortality in patients critically ill with acute-on-chronic liver failure.JHEP reports : innovation in hepatology · 2023Article
- Predictors of Survival After Liver Transplantation in Patients With the Highest Acuity (MELD ≥40).Annals of surgery · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the era of the "sickest first" policy, patients with very high model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) scores have been increasingly admitted to the intensive care unit with the expectation that they will receive a liver transplant (LT) in the absence of improvement on supportive therapies. Such patients are often admitted in a context of acute-on-chronic liver failure with extrahepatic failures. Sequential assessment of scores or classification based on organ failures within the first days after admission help to stratify the risk of mortality in this population. Although the prognosis of severely ill cirrhotic patients has recently improved, transplant-free mortality remains high. LT is still the only curative treatment in this population. Yet, the increased relative scarcity of graft resource must be considered alongside the increased risk of losing a graft in the initial postoperative period when performing LT in "too sick to transplant" patients. Variables associated with poor immediate post-LT outcomes have been identified in large studies. Despite this, the performance of scores based on these variables is still insufficient. Consideration of a patient's comorbidities and frailty is an appealing predictive approach in this population that has proven of great value in many other diseases. So far, local expertise remains the last safeguard to LT. Using this expertise, data are accumulating on favourable post-LT outcomes in very high MELD populations, particularly when LT is performed in a situation of stabilization/improvement of organ failures in selected candidates. The absence of "definitive" contraindications and the control of "dynamic" contraindications allow a "transplantation window" to be defined. This window must be identified swiftly after admission given the poor short-term survival of patients with very high MELD scores. In the absence of any prospect of LT, withdrawal of care could be discussed to ensure respect of patient life, dignity and wishes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.