The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A systematic review of the performance of the model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) in the setting of liver transplantation
Open accessAbstract
The Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score is now used for allocation in liver transplantation (LT) waiting lists, replacing the Child-Turcotte-Pugh (CTP) score. However, there is debate as whether it is superior to CTP score to predict mortality in patients with cirrhosis on the LT waiting list and after LT. We reviewed studies comparing the accuracy of MELD vs. CTP score in transplantation settings. We found that in studies of the LT waiting list (12,532 patients with cirrhosis), only 4 of 11 showed MELD to be superior to CTP in predicting short-term (3-month) mortality. In addition, 2 of 3 studies (n = 1,679) evaluating the changes in MELD score (DeltaMELD) showed that DeltaMELD had better prediction for mortality than the baseline MELD score. The impact of MELD on post-LT mortality was assessed in 15 studies (20,456 patients); only 6 (9,522 patients) evaluated the discriminative ability of MELD score using the concordance (c) statistic (the MELD score had always a c-statistic < 0.70). In 11 studies (19,311 patients), high MELD score indicated poor post-LT mortality for cutoff values of 24-40 points. In re-LT patients, 2 of 4 studies evaluated the discriminative ability of MELD score on post-LT mortality. Finally, several studies have shown that the predictive ability of MELD score increases by adding clinical variables (hepatic encephalopathy, ascites) or laboratory (sodium) parameters. On the basis of the current literature, MELD score does not perform better than the CTP score for patients with cirrhosis on the waiting list and cannot predict post-LT mortality.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Transection of the oesophagus for bleeding oesophageal varices
Pugh, R. N. H., Murray-Lyon, I. M., Dawson, J. L., Pietroni, M. C., & Williams, R. (1973) · Journal of British Surgery · doi:10.1002/bjs.1800600817 · Cited by 7,941
Malinchoc, M., Kamath, P. S., Gordon, F. D., Peine, C. J., Rank, J., & ter Borg, P. C. J. (2000) · Hepatology · doi:10.1053/he.2000.5852 · Cited by 2,893
Cited by
The MELD score in patients awaiting liver transplant: Strengths and weaknesses
Bernardi, M., Gitto, S., & Biselli, M. (2011) · Journal of Hepatology · doi:10.1016/j.jhep.2010.11.008 · Cited by 174
Fosby, B., Melum, E., Bjøro, K., Bennet, W., Rasmussen, A., Andersen, I. M., Castedal, M., Olausson, M., Wibeck, C., Gotlieb, M., et al. (2015) · Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology · doi:10.3109/00365521.2015.1036359 · Cited by 99
Metadata
- Authors
- Cholongitas, E., Marelli, L., Shusang, V., Senzolo, M., Rolles, K., Patch, D., & Burroughs, A. K.
- Venue
- Liver Transplantation
- Published
- 2006
- Volume
- 12
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 1049-1061
- ISSN
- 1527-6465 (ISSN-L)
- 1527-6473
- OpenAlex
- W2053547094
- Cited by
- 302
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 1.77
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A systematic review of the performance of the model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) in the setting of liver transplantation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/lt.20824
- The paper
- Cholongitas, E., Marelli, L., Shusang, V., Senzolo, M., Rolles, K., Patch, D., & Burroughs, A. K. (2006). A systematic review of the performance of the model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) in the setting of liver transplantation. Liver Transplantation. https://doi.org/10.1002/lt.20824
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.