Title |
Liver dysfunction as predictor of prognosis in patients with amyloidosis: utility of the Model for End-stage Liver disease (MELD) scoring system
|
---|---|
Published in |
Internal and Emergency Medicine, August 2016
|
DOI | 10.1007/s11739-016-1500-0 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Francesco Cappelli, Samuele Baldasseroni, Franco Bergesio, Valentina Spini, Alessia Fabbri, Paola Angelotti, Elisa Grifoni, Paola Attanà, Francesca Tarantini, Niccolò Marchionni, Alberto Moggi Pignone, Federico Perfetto |
Abstract |
Amyloidosis prognosis is often related to the onset of heart failure and a worsening that is concomitant with kidney-liver dysfunction; thus the Model for End-stage Liver disease (MELD) may be an ideal instrument to summarize renal-liver function. Our aim has been to test the MELD score as a prognostic tool in amyloidosis. We evaluated 128 patients, 46 with TTR-related amyloidosis and 82 with AL amyloidosis. All patients had a complete clinical and echocardiography evaluation; overall biohumoral assessment included troponin I, NT-proBNP, creatinine, total bilirubin and INR ratio. The study population was dichotomized at the 12 cut-off level of MELD scores; those with MELD score >12 had a lower survival compared to controls in the study cohort (40.7 vs 66.3 %; p = 0.006). Either as a continuous and dichotomized variable, MELD shows its independent prognostic value at multivariable analysis (HR = 1.199, 95 % CI 1.082-1.329; HR = 2.707, 95 % CI 1.075-6.817, respectively). MELD shows a lower prognostic sensitivity/specificity ratio than troponin I and NT-proBNP in the whole study population and AL subgroup, while in TTR patients MELD has a higher sensitivity/specificity ratio compared to troponin and NT-proBNP (ROC analysis-AUC: 0.853 vs 0.726 vs 0.659). MELD is able to predict prognosis in amyloidosis. A MELD score >12 selects a subgroup of patients with a higher risk of death. The predictive accuracy seems to be more evident in TTR patients in whom currently no effective scoring systems have been validated. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United States | 1 | 50% |
United Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Scientists | 1 | 50% |
Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Unknown | 16 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Master | 4 | 25% |
Researcher | 3 | 19% |
Other | 2 | 13% |
Professor | 2 | 13% |
Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 6% |
Other | 2 | 13% |
Unknown | 2 | 13% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 44% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 19% |
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 6% |
Decision Sciences | 1 | 6% |
Earth and Planetary Sciences | 1 | 6% |
Other | 0 | 0% |
Unknown | 3 | 19% |