ArticleSurgical endoscopy2026
MELD score is predictive of postoperative morbidity and mortality in patients with acute appendicitis undergoing appendectomy: ACS-NSQIP data analysis.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score has been shown to be a valid predictive tool for postoperative risks across various types of surgeries, after initially being restricted to liver transplantation eligibility assessment in cirrhotic patients. Since appendectomy is one of the most common surgical procedures, our objective is to compare the impact of the three versions of the MELD score (1.0, 2.0, and 3.0) on the risk assessment of 30-day postoperative morbidity and mortality in patients undergoing appendectomy for acute appendicitis.
methodsData on patients undergoing appendectomy for acute appendicitis were collected from the ACS-NSQIP database from 2018 to 2022 using the Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes 44,950, 44,960, and 44,970. The different MELD scores and outcomes were compared using the Chi-square test. The outcomes measured included 30-day mortality, wound infection, cardiac, respiratory, urinary, and central nervous system complications, thromboembolism, sepsis, bleeding, return to the operating room, and composite morbidity.
resultsA total of 121,207 patients were included, with a mean age of 45.31 ± 17.89 years, of which 58,495 (48.3%) were females. The majority, 102,895 (90.7%) patients, underwent laparoscopic appendectomy, whereas 10,599 (9.3%) had open appendectomy. The overall 30-day surgical mortality was 0.5% (567/121,207), and postoperative sepsis was observed in 5.8% (7,063/121,207). All the MELD score versions significantly predicted the outcomes independently of the surgical approach (laparoscopic/open appendectomy, simple/complicated appendicitis) with means of 8.21 ± 2.81, 9.01 ± 3.39, and 9.21 ± 3.26 for MELD 1.0, MELD 2.0, and MELD 3.0 scores, respectively. MELD 3.0 score noticeably outperformed its predecessors regarding all the outcomes. Patients with a score ≥ 11 had a higher prevalence of postoperative complications.
conclusionThe MELD score, in its three versions, is a valid tool for assessing 30-day morbidity and mortality risk following appendectomy for acute appendicitis. MELD 3.0, with a cutoff of 11, demonstrated superior predictive performance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41171421What 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.