Search

Background. Several risk models to predict outcome after liver transplantation (LT) have been developed in the last decade. This study compares the predictive performance of 7 risk models. Methods. Data on 62 294 deceased donor LTs performed in recipients ≥18 years old between January 2005 and December 2015 in the United Network for Organ Sharing region were used for this study. The balance of risk, donor risk index (DRI), Eurotransplant-DRI, donor-to-recipient model (DRM), simplified recipient risk index, Survival Outcomes Following Liver Transplantation (SOFT), and donor Model for End-stage Liver Disease scores were calculated, and calibration and discrimination were evaluated for patient, overall graft, and death-censored graft survival. Calibration was evaluated by outcome of high-risk transplantations (>80th percentile of the respective risk score) and discrimination by concordance index (c-index). Results. Patient survival at 3 months was best predicted by the SOFT (c-index: 0.68) and Balance of Risk score (c-index: 0.64), while the DRM and SOFT score had the highest predictive capacity at 60 months (c-index: 0.59). Overall, graft survival was best predicted by the SOFT score at 3-month follow-up (c-index: 0.65) and by the SOFT and DRM at 60-month follow-up (c-index: 0.58). Death-censored graft survival at 60-month follow-up is best predicted by the DRI (c-index: 0.59) and Eurotransplant-DRI (c-index: 0.58). For patient and overall graft survival, high-risk transplantations were best defined by the DRM. For death-censored graft survival, this was best defined by the DRI. Conclusions. This study shows that models dominated by recipient factors have the best performance for short-term patient survival. Models that also include sufficient donor factors have better performance for long-term graft survival. Death-censored graft survival is best predicted by models that predominantly included donor factors.

Background. Outcome after liver transplantation (LT) is determined by donor, transplant and recipient risk factors. These factors may have different impact on either patient or graft survival (outcome type). In the literature, there is wide variation in the use of outcome types and points in time (short term or long term). Objective of this study is to analyze the predictive capacity of risk factors and risk models in LT and how they vary over time and per outcome type. Methods. All LTs performed in the Netherlands from January 1, 2002, to December 31, 2011, were analyzed with multivariate analyses at 3-month, 1-year, and 5-year for patient and (non-)death-censored graft survival. The predictive capacity of the investigated risk models was compared with concordance indices. Results. Recipient age, model for end-stage liver disease sodium, ventilatory support, diabetes mellitus, hepatocellular carcinoma, previous malignancy, hepatitis C virus antibody, hepatitis B virus antibody, perfusion fluid, and Eurotransplant donor risk index (ET-DRI) had significant impact on outcome (graft or patient survival) at 1 or multiple points in time. Significant factors at 3-month patient survival (recipient age, model for end-stage liver disease sodium, ventilatory support) were used to compose a concept model. This model, had a higher c-index than the balance-of-risk score, DRI, ET-DRI, donor-recipient model and simplified recipient risk index for long-term patient and non–death-censored graft survival. Conclusions. In this study, the effects of recipient risk factors and models on different outcome types and time points were shown. Short-term patient survival mainly depends on recipient risk factors, long-term graft survival on donor risk factors and is more difficult to predict. Next to the concept model, the donor-recipient model has a higher predictive capacity to other risk models for (long-term) patient and non–death-censored graft survival. The DRI and ET-DRI best predicted death-censored graft survival. Knowledge about risk factors and models is critical when using these for waitlist management and/or help in organ allocation and decision-making.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to determine occurrence rates of catheter-related problems and their association to pertinent clinical characteristics in men with indwelling urinary catheters following laparoscopic radical prostatectomy., Study Design: Descriptive, correlational study., Subjects and Setting: One hundred twelve men who underwent laparoscopic radical prostatectomy between December 2010 and December 2012 at the Leiden University Medical Centre in the Netherlands were included in this study. After surgery, a Charriere 20 (20F) silicone catheter was left indwelling for 1 week., Methods: Data were gathered from 2 sources; we reviewed participants' medical records, and participants completed a questionnaire designed for this study. Pearson χ tests were used to analyze associations between dichotomous and ordinal variables and catheter-related problems. Univariate logistic regression analyses were used to analyze the relationships between continuous factors and catheter-related problems., Results: Seventy-five percent of participants reported at least 1 catheter-related problem. Univariate regression analyses revealed correlations between body weight and experiencing catheter-related problems (odds ratio [OR] = 1.050; P = .028) and between body mass index and experiencing catheter-related problems (OR = 1.159; P = .049)., Conclusion: Indwelling catheter-related problems after laparoscopic radical prostatectomy are prevalent, and they may occur at any time during the entire period of catheter use. High body mass index and high body weight were associated with an increased likelihood of catheter-related problems following radical prostatectomy.