Evidence Hub

Predicting futile outcomes following deceased donor liver transplantation in non-HCC patients with MELD-Na score above 30: a retrospective international multicenter cohort study

H. Jo, Young-in Yoon, Ki-Hun Kim, P. Tabrizian, R. Marino, Pedro Marin-Castro, W. Andraus, Jongman Kim et al.

International Journal of Surgery, 2025

994 participants · 3 citations

Abstract

Introduction: In the current “sickest first” allocation policy for limited deceased liver grafts, identifying patients “too sick to transplant” before transplantation is crucial to optimize outcomes. This study aimed to predict futile outcomes following deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) in patients with model for end-stage liver disease-sodium (MELD-Na) scores ≥30. Methods: This international multicenter study was conducted as part of the International Society of Liver Surgeons. We collected data from patients with a MELD-Na score of ≥30 who underwent DDLT. A total of 994 patients were enrolled between 2010 and 2021, including 654 from the Republic of Korea, 224 from the USA, and 116 from other regions. Futility was defined as death within 3 months or during the hospital stay following a DDLT. After exclusion, 160 (16.6%) patients were classified into a futile group and 803 (83.4%) into a non-futile group. Results: The MELD-Na scores collected at three time points (listing, matching, and transplantation) were comparable between the groups (P = 0.442, P = 0.180, and P = 0.554, respectively). Regarding concomitant organ failure factors, the futile group showed a higher incidence of organ dysfunction across all measured parameters, including the use of mechanical ventilators, continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT), pneumonia, bacteremia, and vasopressor use (all P < 0.01). Independent risk factors for futile outcome were recipient age (≥65 years), body mass index…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 994 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free