MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408845766 · doi:10.1097/lvt.0000000000000608

Decompensated cirrhosis but low MELD—Should we wait or refer for liver transplantation?

2025· article· en· W4408845766 on OpenAlexaff
Noreen Singh, Yu Jun Wong, Patrizia Burra, Nazia Selzner, Aldo J. Montaño‐Loza

Bibliographic record

VenueLiver Transplantation · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLiver Disease and Transplantation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoToronto General HospitalUniversity of Alberta HospitalAlberta Hospital Edmonton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDecompensationLiver transplantationCirrhosisAscitesHepatic encephalopathyInternal medicineLiver diseaseTransplantationCreatinineEncephalopathyHepatorenal syndromeGastroenterologyIntensive care medicineBilirubin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cirrhosis constitutes a significant global health burden with decompensation characterized by ascites, hepatic encephalopathy, as well as variceal hemorrhage. These decompensation features are independent predictors of mortality. Liver transplantation remains the definitive treatment for patients with cirrhosis. However, given that this is a limited resource, thus its allocation, using the MELD score, has to be judicious despite decompensation features affecting the patient's quality of life. Patients with grade 3 ascites or overt hepatic encephalopathy have significant mortality; therefore, in some instances, these decompensation features should be considered indications for liver transplantation despite low MELD. The majority of patients listed for liver transplantation have low MELD scores (≤15 points); and approximately half will die due to liver-related complications. Current evidence demonstrates a mortality reduction of ~40% with LT in those patients with a low MELD. Furthermore, new scores have been developed, such as the MELD 3.0, which incorporates female sex, albumin, and all the MELD-Na components (bilirubin, creatinine, international normalized ratio, and sodium), and the Gender-Equity Model for Liver Allocation, that includes bilirubin, international normalized ratio, and the Royal Free Hospital glomerular filtration rate, which have demonstrated improved discrimination. Lastly, to address the limited resource, living donor liver transplant has demonstrated a significant survival benefit in patients even at MELD-Na scores as low as 11, suggesting that life-years gained are similar to deceased-donor transplant. In this review, our goal is to present the frequency of patients listed for transplant with low MELD, and the limitation of using MELD in patients for liver transplantation. We will provide practical guidance on the management of common complications of cirrhosis and early consideration for liver transplant referral in patients with clinical decompensation and low MELD.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.427
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.267 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLiver TransplantationSame topicLiver Disease and TransplantationFrench-language works237,207