Volume 24, Issue 7 e13775
ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Pediatric retransplantation of the liver: A prognostic scoring tool

David M. Vock

David M. Vock

Division of Biostatistics, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA

Search for more papers by this author
Alexander Kuehne

Alexander Kuehne

Department of Surgery, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA

Search for more papers by this author
Elise F. Northrop

Elise F. Northrop

Division of Biostatistics, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA

Search for more papers by this author
Arthur J. Matas

Arthur J. Matas

Department of Surgery, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA

Search for more papers by this author
Catherine Larson Nath

Catherine Larson Nath

Department of Pediatrics, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA

Search for more papers by this author
Srinath Chinnakotla

Corresponding Author

Srinath Chinnakotla

Department of Surgery, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA

Department of Pediatrics, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA

Correspondence

Srinath Chinnakotla, Department of Surgery, University of Minnesota Medical CenterMMC 195, 420 Delaware St SE, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA.

Email: [email protected]

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 13 August 2020
Citations: 8

Abstract

Few prognostic models have been created in children that receive liver retransplantation (rLT). We examined the SRTR database of 731 children that underwent second liver transplant between 2002 and 2018. Proportional hazards models using backward variable selection were used to identify recipient, donor, and surgical characteristics associated with survival. A simple prognostic scoring system or nomogram (ie, each risk factor was weighted on a five-point scale) was constructed based on the fitted model. Recipient age (P < .001), MELD/PELD (P < .001), recipient ventilated (P = .003), donor cause of death (P = .024), graft type (P = .045), first graft loss due to biliary tract complications (P = .048), and survival time of the first graft (P = .006) were significant predictors of retransplant survival. The bias-corrected Harrell's C-index for the multivariable model was 0.63. Survival was significantly different (P < .001) for those at low risk (0-4 points), medium risk (5-7 points), and high risk (8+ points). Survival was equivalent between low risk pediatric second transplant recipients and pediatric primary liver transplant recipients (P = .67) but significantly worse for medium- (P < .001) and high-risk (P < .001) recipients. With simple clinical characteristics, this scoring tool can modestly discriminate between those children at high risk and those children at low risk of poor outcomes after second liver transplant.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.