MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2042309266 · doi:10.1097/tp.0b013e3181a5e5f1

MELD Score and Blood Product Requirements During Liver Transplantation: No Link

2009· article· en· W2042309266 on OpenAlexaff
Luc Massicotte, Danielle Beaulieu, Jean-Denis Roy, Denis Marleau, Frank Vandenbroucke, M. Dagenais, Réal Lapointe, André Roy

Bibliographic record

VenueTransplantation · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrgan Transplantation Techniques and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsHôpital Saint-LucUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBlood productLiver transplantationBlood transfusionModel for End-Stage Liver DiseaseSurgeryLiver diseaseCohortHepatocellular carcinomaTransplantationInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Orthotopic liver transplantation has been traditionally associated with major blood loss and the need for allogenic blood product transfusions. In recent years, improvements in surgical and anesthetic techniques have greatly decreased the amount of blood products transfused. We have published a median of 0 for all intraoperative blood products transfused. Some authors argue that these results could be possible merely because of the relatively healthy cohort in terms of model of end-stage liver disease (MELD) score. The MELD score could be adjusted by some conditions (hepatocellular carcinoma, hemodialysis, hepatopulmonary syndrome, and amyloidosis) and was not adjusted in these series. The goal of this work was to verify the MELD score according to US standards and to find any link between the MELD score and the transfusion rate. METHOD: Three hundred fifty consecutive liver transplantations were studied. The MELD score was adjusted according to US standards. Patients were divided into two groups according to the median of the MELD score. Blood loss and transfusion rate were determined for these two groups. Logistic regression models were used to find any link with transfusion of red blood cell (RBC) units. RESULT: The MELD score before adjusting was 19+/-9 and 22+/-10 after. A mean of 0.5+/-1.3 RBC units/patient intraoperative were transfused with 80.6% of cases without any blood products. There was no difference for the blood loss (999+/-670 mL vs. 1017+/-885 mL) or the transfusion rate (0.4+/-1.2 vs. 0.5+/-1.4 RBC/patient) between two groups of MELD (<21 or >or=21) or any of its component (creatinine, bilirubin, and international normalized ratio). The logistic regression analysis found that only two variables were linked to RBC transfusion; starting hemoglobin value and phlebotomy. CONCLUSION: In this series, the MELD score was as high as US series and did not predict blood losses and blood product requirement during liver transplantation. If the MELD system has to be implemented to prioritize orthotopic liver transplantation, it should be revisited, and the starting hemoglobin value should be added to the equation.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.428
Threshold uncertainty score0.871

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.249 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations80
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransplantationSame topicOrgan Transplantation Techniques and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207