肝移植治疗慢性重型肝炎手术时机的选择(附59例临床分析)

目的:探讨慢性重型肝炎行肝移植术的合适手术时机。方法:总结2003年9月～2005年7月我科收治的59例慢性重型肝炎病人的临床资料,有52例行肝移植术,7例未行肝移植术,并就病人肝移植手术时机的选择和预后作回顾性分析。结果:本组59例慢性重型肝炎病人,肝移植组的1年存活率为83.3%,明显高于内科综合治疗组的14.3%(P<0.01)。肝移植组中,术前终末期肝病模型(MELD)评分≥16分病人的1年生存率为76.5%,明显低于MELD评分<16分病人的89.5%(P<0.05);术前MELD评分≥16分的病人平均手术时间(7.3±2.6)h,明显长于MELD评分<16分的(5.4±1.5)h(P<0.05);术前MELD评分≥16分病人的术中失血量和输血量分别为(4860±1980)ml和(5240±2160)ml,明显多于MELD评分<16分病人的(1780±670)ml和(2110±790)ml(P<0.01);术前MELD评分≥16分病人的术后呼吸支持时间I、CU留置时间和住院时间分别为(5.3±2.2)d(、6.1±2.7)d和(31.7±11.6)d,明显长于MELD评分<16分病人的(3.2±2.1)d(、3.4±2.0)d和(23.8±7.5)d(P<0.05);术前MELD评分≥16分病人的平均住院费用为(36.9±9.3)万元,明显高于MELD评分<16分病人的(23.2±5.2)万元(P<0.05);术前MELD评分≥16分病人的术后各种感染及肾功能衰竭并发症的发生率分别为71.4%和23.8%,明显高于MELD评分<16分病人的35.4%和3.2%(P<0.01)。结论:慢性重型肝炎病人术前MELD评分≥12分并<16分时是比较合适的手术时机,而术前MELD评分≥16分的病人手术预后明显较差。     

MELD评分与肝移植围手术期并发症及死亡率的相关性

目的探讨MELD评分与肝移植围手术期并发症及死亡率之间的关系。方法回顾性分析160例肝移植患者的临床资料。以肝移植前最后一次检测血清胆红素、肌酐、凝血酶原时间的国际标准化比值(INR)为依据,计算患者的MELD评分。根据MELD评分的不同将患者分成3组。A组:MELD评分<15分81例(50.6%);B组:MELD评分为15～24分45例(28.1%);C组:MELD评分≥25分34例(21.3%)。分别统计各组患者术中情况、围手术期并发症及死亡情况。结果MELD评分高的患者平均手术时间较长,术中平均出血量较多,与MELD评分低的患者比较,差异有统计学意义(P<0.01)。MELD评分高的患者术后肺部严重感染或呼吸衰竭、肾功能衰竭、心血管并发症、移植相关性脑病、腹腔内出血等并发症的发生率以及围手术期死亡率均较高,与MELD评分低的患者相比较,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。各组的无肝期时间、围手术期胆道并发症、血管并发症及排斥反应的发生率相比较,差异无统计学意义。结论MELD评分与肝移植围手术期肝外重要脏器并发症的发生率及患者死亡率之间存在着密切的相关性。MELD评分≥25分的患者是肝移植的高危受者,应加强围手术期重要脏器功能的调理及支持。     

终末期肝病模型评分较高的良性终末期肝病患者肝移植疗效评价

目的 探讨终末期肝病模型(MELD)评分较高的良性终末期肝病患者的肝移植疗效.方法 回顾分析80例良性终末期肝病肝移植患者的资料,根据MELD评分的不同将患者分成两组,MELD评分≥30分的23例为高MELD评分组,MELD评分＜30分的57例为低MELD评分组.分别比较两组患者手术时间、术中无肝期、术中血液制品输入量、术后重症监护病房(ICU)治疗时间和受者1年存活率,同时比较死亡患者和存活患者的临床资料,寻找导致术后死亡的危险因素.结果 高MELD评分组的手术时间、术中血液制品输入量、ICU治疗时间以及术后3个月内的死亡率明显高于低MELD评分组,差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05),而术中无肝期和患者1年存活率,两组间的差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).死亡者和存活者相比较,MELD评分的差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05),而术前机械通气、血清钠水平、持续性肝性脑病(重型)等方面的差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05).结论 对于良性终末期肝病患者,单纯依靠MELD评分不足以准确判断患者肝移植术后的生存状态,高MELD评分者也可获得较好的肝移植结果,术前严重的低钠血症、重度肝性脑病以及机械通气是除MELD评分以外影响患者术后生存状况的危险因素.     

高MELD评分终末期肝病患者接受中国公民逝世后器官捐献供肝肝移植的近期疗效评价

目的  探讨高终末期肝病模型(MELD)评分终末期肝病患者接受中国公民逝世后器官捐献供肝肝移植的近期疗效和安全性。 方法  回顾性分析2011年9月至2014年6月在佛山市第一人民医院实施公民逝世后器官捐献供肝肝移植并存活的34例受者的临床资料。根据术前MELD评分, 将受者分为高MELD组(MELD评分≥25分, 8例)和低MELD组(MELD评分 < 25分, 26例)。比较两组受者肝移植术前、术中和术后情况。 结果  术前, 高MELD组需要人工肝治疗者比例、急性肝衰竭和慢加急性肝衰竭的发生率均高于低MELD组(均为P < 0.05)。术中, 两组受者的出血量、输血量、供肝热缺血时间、供肝冷缺血时间、无肝期、手术时间、手术方式等比较, 差异均无统计学意义(均为P > 0.05)。术后, 高MELD组的入住ICU时间长于低MELD组(P < 0.05)。两组术后住院时间、住院病死率、早期并发症发生率、随访时间、总体生存率方面比较, 差异无统计学意义(均为P > 0.05)。肝移植术后高MELD组的天冬氨酸转氨酶(AST)峰值高于低MELD组。两组受者术后胆漏、腹腔脓肿和肝功能不全的发生率比较, 差异有统计学意义(均为P < 0.05)。 结论  高MELD评分终末期肝病患者接受中国公民逝世后器官捐献供肝肝移植能取得较好的近期效果且安全可行。     

终末期肝病模型用于慢性重症肝炎患者肝移植预后的评估

目的 探讨终末期肝病模型(MELD)预测慢性重症肝炎患者肝移植后早期存活率的价值.方法 共有42例慢性重症肝炎患者接受了肝移植,所有患者的原发病均为乙型肝炎.按照2000年修订的重症肝炎临床分期标准,19例为早期,16例为中期,7例为晚期.Child-Pugh分级,除1例为B级外,其余均为C级.对所有患者进行MELD评分和Child-Pugh评分,并进行比较.绘制ROC曲线,根据ROC曲线下面积评估MELD评分和Child-Pugh评分对肝移植后早期死亡率的预测价值.依据两种评分的ROC曲线临界值,分别绘制Kaplan-Meier生存曲线,Log-Rank检验比较生存曲线的组问差异.采用Spearman等级相关检验分析两种评分方式的相关性.结果 随访至术后3个月,42例中,死亡7例.死亡者的MELD评分和Child-Pugh评分分别为(32.97±7.11)分和(12.57±0.98)分,明显高于存活者的(24.90)±4.96)分和(11.51±1.17)分(P＜0.01,P＜0.05).MELD评分评估患者术后3个月内存活率的最佳临界值是25.67,敏感性和特异性分别是85.7 %和60.0 %,ROC曲线下面积为0.841.Child-Pugh评分评估患者术后3个月内存活率的最佳临界值是11.5,敏感性和特异性分别是85.7 %和54.3 %,ROC曲线下面积为0.747.根据两种评分方法绘制的Kaplan-Meier生存曲线均能有效区分可能死亡和可能存活的患者.Spearman等级相关分析表明两种评分方法的相关系数为0.307(P＜0.05).结论 MELD评分和Child-Pugh评分对慢性重症肝炎患者肝移植后早期存活率均有预测价值;MELD评分能够更好的预测慢性重型肝炎患者术后近期死亡率.     

终末期良性肝病患者肝移植后免疫抑制治疗单中心经验总结

目的 总结单中心原发病为良性终末期肝病患者肝移植后免疫抑制剂的应用经验,探讨个体化治疗方案.方法 回顾性分析单中心1400例肝移植中645例原发病为良性终末期肝病者的资料.2002年4月至2004年12月为第1阶段(共146例),受者均采用常规三联用药方案,即他克莫司(Tac)+吗替麦考酚酯(MMF)+甲泼尼龙(MP);2005年1月至2007年12月为第2阶段(共273例),受者用药量较前减少;2008年1月至2010年8月为第3阶段(共226例),根据术前终末期肝病模型(MELD)评分及受者状况分为常规组和重症组,采用个体化免疫抑制方案.结果 3个阶段中,MELD评分<25分者的存活率分别为88.9%、94.2%和95.4%,MELD评分≥25分者的存活率分别为67.7%、73.4%和82.0%.3个阶段中MELD评分<25分者排斥反应发生率的差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),MELD评分≥25分者第2阶段和第3阶段排斥反应发生率稍高于第1阶段(P<0.05).结论 肝移植术后免疫抑制剂的应用可根据受者的具体情况进行个体化应用,有利于提高其存活率.

Abstract：

Objective To analyze the individual immunosuppressive protocol (IP) after liver transplantation (LT) in benign end-stage liver disease. Methods The clinical data of 645 patients with benign end-stage liver disease undergoing LT in our institute from April 2002 to Aug 2010 wen analyzed retrospectively. 146 cases from Apr. 2002 to Dec. 2004 were in stage one, and triple therapy containing tacrolimus (Tac), mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) and methylprednisolone (MP) was used;273 cases from Jan. 2005 to Dec 2007 were in stage two, and the less dose of immunosuppressant than stage one was used; 226 cases from Jan. 2008 to Aug. 2010 were in stage three, and they wen divided into conventional group and severe patient group according to their preoperative model for endstage liver disease (MELD) score and patient condition, the individual IP was used. Results The overall survival rate of patients with MELD score <25 was 88. 9 % in stage one, 94. 2 % in stage two, and 95. 4 % in stage three; The overall survival rate of patients with MELD score ≥25 was 67. 7 % in stage one, 73. 4 % in stage two, and 82. 0 % in stage three. The incidence of rejection ir cases with MELD score <25 had no significant difference (P>0. 05). The incidence of rejection in cases with MELD score ≥25 in stage two and stage three was higher slightly than in stage one (P<0. 05). Conclusion The IP after liver transplantation should be individualized according to recipient conditions, which can increase survival rate.     

终末期肝病模型对肝移植术后生存率的预测

目的探讨终末期肝病模型（model of end-stage liver disease，MELD）对良性终末期肝病肝移植患者生存率预测的价值。方法回顾性分析170例良性终末期肝病肝移植患者的临床资料，利用受试者工作特性曲线下面积（c-statistic值）评价MELD或Child-Turcotte-Pugh（CTP）评分预测患者肝移植术后生存时间的准确性。根据MELD值不同将患者分为3组：A组〈15，B组15～24和C组≥25，用Kaplan—Meier生存分析方法比较3组患者肝移植术后的生存率差别。结果MELD和CTP评分预测肝移植术后1、3、12个月生存率的c-statistic值分别为0．765和0．793、0．711和0．713、0．681和0．688。两者在同一时间的c-statistic值差异均无统计学意义。MELD评分与CTP评分有相关性（r=0．669，P=0．000）。A组和B组之间生存率差异无统计学意义（P=0．665），但C组生存率明显低于A组和B组，差异有统计学意义（分别为P=0．007和P=0．031）。结论MELD可以作为预测良性终末期肝病肝移植患者术后中、短期生存的指标，MELD≥25患者肝移植预后较差。MELD判断能力与CTP评分无明显差别。     

30例肝移植病例MELD分析

目的探讨终末期肝病模型（MELD）评分评估终末期肝病患者行肝移植术后,受者短期预后、肝移植的手术时机以及MELD与肝脏病理的关系。方法对30例肝移植病例进行回顾性分析,比较术后随访30天后存活组（12例）与死亡组（18例）的术前MELD评分,以MELD分值25和30为界线将病例分组,比较存活率以及肝脏病理,分析大块、亚大块肝细胞坏死与非大块、亚大块肝细胞坏死病例的MELD分值。结果所有患者术前MELD评分平均值为28．92±13．45,术后随访3个月总生存率为40％,其中存活组与死亡组术前MELD评分分别为21．56±11．83和33．82±12．43（P〈0．05）;以MELD评分25为界将患者分为两组,术后3个月存活率为63．6％和26．3％（P〈0．05）;以MELD评分30为界将患者分为两组,术后3个月存活率为53．3％和26．7％（P〉0．05）：大块、亚大块肝细胞坏死组与非大块、亚大块肝细胞坏死组患者术前MELD值相比有显著差异,分别为22．38±12．69和33．28±12．41（P〈0．05）。结论MELD评分可评估肝移植受术者的短期预后,肝移植受者MELD评分值在25分时比30分时行肝移植术更有意义,MELD评分与肝细胞坏死面积有关。     

慢性重型肝炎肝移植的手术时机

目的 探讨慢性重型肝炎肝移植的手术时机.方法 回顾性分析135例慢性重型肝炎病人的临床资料,应用终末期肝病模型(MELD)评估病人病情,比较病人入院时MELD值和接受治疗2周后△MELD值与病人3个月死亡率之间的关系.结果 死亡组病人入院时MELD值为37±7,存活组为26±5,两组间差异有显著统计学意义(P＜0.01);死亡组病人接受治疗2周后△MELD值为1.6±2.2,存活组为-1±5,两组间差异有显著统计学意义(P＜0.01).病人入院时MELD值和接受治疗2周后△MELD值预测慢性重型肝炎病人3个月内死亡率的c-statistic分别为0.903和0.760.如MELD值＜25,病人3个月后死亡率为1.8%;25≤MELD值≤30,死亡率为7.4%;30＜MELD值＜35,死亡率为42.9%;MELD值≥35,死亡率为80.6%,各组间死亡率比较差异有非常显著的统计学意义(P＜0.01);△MELD分值＞0组和≤0组的死亡率分别为51%和13.1%,两组间死亡率有非常显著的差异(P＜0.01).结论 MELD分值和△MELD分值与慢性重型肝炎病人的死亡率呈正相关,MELD能较准确地预测慢性重型肝炎病人的病情转归,临床医生可以结合病人入院时的MELD分值和接受治疗后的△MELD分值来决定慢性重型肝炎病人中转肝移植的手术时机,MELD值≥35时应该行肝移植治疗.     

MELD评分和CTP分级评估肝移植术后并发症及死亡风险的临床分析

目的应用MELD评分及CTP分级系统探讨影响肝移植术后并发症发生率和死亡率的高危因素。方法回顾性分析2008年1月到2013年1月收治的184例肝移植患者的临床资料,根据MELD评分分成3组,A组：≤10分;B组：〉10~20分;C组：〉20分。根据CTP评分分成3组,a组：5~6分,b组：7~9分,c组：10~15分。根据是否出现并发症和住院期间是否存活分为并发症组和非并发症组以及死亡组和存活组。结果 （1）A、B、C 3组主要临床指标在Cr、PT、PT-INR、TBIL、失血量、输血量、平均尿量上,差异有统计学意义（P〈0.05）。a、b、c 3组在ALB、PT、PT-INR、TBIL、失血量、输血量、平均尿量上,差异有统计学意义（P〈0.05）。（2）术前高总胆红素和术中输血量增加是肝移植术后发生并发症的高危因素（P〈0.05）。（3）术前PT升高、高MELD评分、术中输血量增加和平均尿量减少是肝移植术后围手术期死亡率增加的高危因素（P〈0.05）。结论 MELD分值和CTP分级越高,肝移植患者术后并发症的发生率和死亡率越高。术前高胆红素、术前凝血功能障碍和肾功能差是肝移植术后并发症及死亡率增加的高危因素。     

Impact of pretransplant MELD score on posttransplant outcome in orthotopic liver transplantation for patients with acute-on-chronic hepatitis B liver failure

This study was performed to evaluate the usefulness of the model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score in comparison with the Child-Turcotte-Pugh (CTP) score to predict short-term postoperative survival and 3-month morbidity among patients with acute-on-chronic hepatitis B liver failure undergoing orthotopic liver transplantation. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed data from all patients undergoing orthotopic liver transplantation in our unit from December 1999 to November 2005, on the admission day MELD and CTP scores were calculated for each patient according to the original formula. We evaluated the accuracy of MELD and CTP to predict postoperative short-term survival and 3-month morbidity using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis and Kaplan-Meier analysis, respectively. RESULTS: Seven of 42 patients died within 3-months follow-up. The MELD scores for nonsurvivors (32.97 +/- 7.11) were significantly higher than those for survivors (24.90 +/- 4.96; P < .05), CTP scores were significantly higher, too (12.57 +/- 0.98, 11.51 +/- 1.17; P < .05). ROC analysis identified the MELD best cut-off point to be 25.67 to predict postoperative morbidity (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.841; sensitivity = 85.7%; specificity = 60.0%), and the CTP best cut-off point was 11.5 (AUC = 0.747; sensitivity = 85.7%; specificity = 54.3%). MELD score was superior to CTP score to predict postoperative short-term survival and 3-month morbidity among patients with acute-on-chronic hepatitis B liver failure undergoing orthotopic liver transplantation. CONCLUSION: MELD score was an objective predictive system and more efficient than CTP score to evaluate the risk of 3-month morbidity and short-term prognosis in patients with acute-on-chronic hepatitis B liver failure undergoing orthotopic liver transplantation.     

Impact of pretransplant MELD score on posttransplant outcome in living donor liver transplantation

It is not clear whether pretransplantation MELD (model for End-Stage Liver Disease) score can foresee posttransplant outcome. We retrospectively evaluated 80 adult patients (55 men, 25 women) who underwent living donor liver transplantation between September 1998 and March 2003. Five other patients with fulminant hepatitis were excluded. The UNOS-modified MELD scores were calculated to stratify patients into three groups: group 1) MELD score less than 15 (n = 13); group 2) MELD score 15 to 24 (n = 36); and group 3) MELD score 25 and higher (n = 26). The patients were predominantly men (n = 52, 69.3%) with overall mean age of 43.9 years (range, 17-62 years). The mean follow-up was 15.7 months (range, 1-47; median = 14 months). The mean MELD score was 22.7 (range, 9-50; median = 21). The overall 1- and 2-year patient survivals were 87% and 78.7%, respectively. The 1-year patient survivals for groups 1, 2, and 3 were 100%, 87%, and 79%; respectively. 2-year survivals, 100%, 79%, and 61%, respectively. Survivals stratified by MELD showed no statistically remarkable differences in 1-year and 2-year patient survival (P = .08). In contrast, 1-year and 2-year patient survival rates for UNOS status 2A, 2B, and 3 were 73%-50%, 95%-91%, and 91%-91%, statistically significant difference (P = .002). Finally, to date preoperative MELD score showed no significant impact on 1- and 2-year posttransplant outcomes in adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation recipients, but we await longer-term follow-up with greater numbers of patients.     

High model for end-stage liver disease score as a predictor of survival during long-term follow-up after liver transplantation

Background

The allocation of cadaveric livers for transplantation in the United States is now based on the severity of illness as determined by the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD), which was developed to predict short-term mortality in patients with cirrhosis. However, its impact to predict posttransplantation survival is controversial. The objective of this study was to determine the association of various pretransplantation risk factors, including the MELD score and whether its use to allocate organs is likely to lead to overall poorer outcomes of liver transplantation.

Methods

The 1,032 consecutive adult liver transplantation patients at King's College Hospital between 2 January 1994 and 29 December 2001 were examined for 9 preoperative risk factors, including MELD score, using univariate and multivariate techniques. Based on their pretransplantation MELD scores, we categorized recipients as low (<15) medium (15-25), or high (>25). Kaplan-Meier patient survival analysis was used to identify differences in outcomes.

Results

The patients had a mean age of 47.2 years and mean posttransplantation follow-up of 5.3 years. Univariate analysis showed recipient diabetes mellitus, renal dysfunction, and pretransplantation MELD score to be associated with patient survival. Multivariate analysis showed the MELD score to be significantly associated with death during long-term follow-up.

Conclusions

A high pretransplantation MELD score was associated with poor posttransplantation outcomes.     

术后首次MELD评分及其衍生评分对肝衰竭患者肝移植术后早期生存率的预测价值

目的  探讨术后首次终末期肝病模型(MELD)评分及其衍生评分MELD联合血清钠(MELD-Na)评分、MELD联合血乳酸(MELD-Lac)评分对于肝衰竭患者肝移植术后早期生存率的预测能力。方法  回顾性分析135例肝衰竭肝移植受者的临床资料,根据术后28 d的生存情况分为早期生存组(110例)和早期死亡组(25例),比较两组患者的临床资料,采用受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线确定MELD评分、MELD-Na评分与MELD-Lac评分对肝衰竭患者肝移植术后早期生存率预测的最佳截取值,以评价不同评分预测肝衰竭患者肝移植术后早期生存率的能力。结果  两组患者术后首次MELD评分、MELD-Na评分、MELD-Lac评分比较,差异均有统计学意义(均为P < 0.05)。术后首次MELD评分、MELD-Na评分、MELD-Lac评分预测肝衰竭患者肝移植术后早期生存率的AUC分别为0.653 [95%可信区间(CI) 0.515~0.792]、0.648(95% CI 0.514~0.781)、0.809 (95% CI 0.718~0.900),最佳截取值分别为18.09、18.09、19.97,约登指数分别为0.398、0.380、0.525,灵敏度分别为0.680、0.680、0.840,特异度分别为0.720、0.700、0.690。MELD-Lac评分预测肝衰竭患者肝移植术后早期生存率的AUC大于MELD评分和MELD-Na评分,差异均有统计学意义(均为P < 0.05)。结论  术后首次MELD评分及MELD-Na评分对于肝衰竭患者肝移植术后早期生存率预测能力一般,而术后首次MELD-Lac评分是肝衰竭患者肝移植术后早期生存率更为可靠的预测指标。     

Prognosis after liver transplantation predicted by preoperative MELD score

The model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) has been an excellent predictor of 3-month mortality among cirrhotic patients awaiting orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT). The aim of this study was to evaluate whether the preoperative MELD score predicts short-term prognosis after OLT. We enrolled 98 adult liver transplant patients performed at our center from January 2001 to December 2002. In univariate analysis of risk factors for death within 3 and 6 months after liver transplantation, serum total bilirubin, creatinine, MELD score, hyponatremia with ascites, Child-Turcotte-Pugh (CTP) score were statistically significant parameters (P < .05). By logistic regression, none of the risk factors were subjected to multivariate analysis showed statistical significance. The odds ratios of the MELD score, hyponatremia with ascites, CTP score within 3 months were 0.997, 1.151, and 0.726 with 95% confidence intervals of [0.899, 1.105], [0.102, 12.959], and [0.389, 1.352], respectively. The odds ratio of MELD score, hyponatremia with ascites, CTP score within 6 months were 0.996, 0.914, and 0.764, with 95% confidence intervals of [0.901, 1.102], [0.089, 9.369], and [0.417, 1.401], respectively. Although MELD score has been a good predictor of short-term prognosis before OLT, MELD did not show an influence on the short-term prognosis after liver transplantation in this study.