Author
Sue V. McDiarmid
Other affiliations: Mayo Clinic, UCLA Medical Center
Bio: Sue V. McDiarmid is an academic researcher from University of California, Los Angeles. The author has contributed to research in topics: Liver transplantation & Transplantation. The author has an hindex of 43, co-authored 104 publications receiving 9340 citations. Previous affiliations of Sue V. McDiarmid include Mayo Clinic & UCLA Medical Center.
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
TL;DR: Data suggest that the MELD score is able to accurately predict 3-month mortality among patients with chronic liver disease on the liver waiting list and can be applied for allocation of donor livers.
2,225 citations
TL;DR: A number of guidelines were established for creating an index of disease severity to estimate survival in patients with chronic liver disease and it was determined that such a disease severity index should rely on a few, readily available, objective variables that would be generally applicable to a heterogeneous group of patients with end-stage liver disease.
811 citations
TL;DR: The development and initial implementation of a continuous disease severity scale that uses objective, readily available variables to predict mortality risk in patients with end‐stage liver disease and reduce the emphasis on waiting time is described.
653 citations
TL;DR: Long-term benefits of OLT are greatest in pediatric and nonurgent patients, and multiple factors involving the recipient, etiology of liver disease, donor characteristics, operative variables, and surgical experience influence long-term survival outcomes.
Abstract: Objective: Few studies have evaluated long-term outcomes after orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT). This work analyzes the experience of nearly 2 decades by the same team in a single center. Outcomes of OLT and factors affecting survival were analyzed. Methods: Retrospective analysis of 3200 consecutive OLTs that were performed at our institution, between February 1984 and December 31, 2001. Results: Of 2662 recipients, 578 (21.7%) and 659 (24.7%) were pediatric and urgent patients, respectively. Overall 1-, 5-, 10-, and 15-year patient and graft survival estimates were 81%, 72%, 68%, 64% and 73%, 64%, 59%, 55%, respectively. Patient survival significantly improved in the second (1992-2001) versus the era I (1984-1991) of transplantation (P 18 years (P < 0.001) or urgent patients (P < 0.001). Of 13 donor and recipient variables, era of OLT, recipient age, urgent status, donor age, donor length of hospital stay, etiology of liver disease, retransplantation, warm and cold ischemia, but not graft type (whole, split, living-donor), significantly impacted patient survival. Conclusions: Long-term benefits of OLT are greatest in pediatric and nonurgent patients. Multiple factors involving the recipient, etiology of liver disease, donor characteristics, operative variables, and surgical experience influence long-term survival outcomes. By balancing and matching these factors with a given recipient, optimum results can be achieved.
380 citations
TL;DR: This report summarizes a recent meeting cosponsored by the American Society of Transplant Physicians and the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases to formulate minimal criteria by which patients with severe liver disease will be placed on the waiting list for liver transplantation.
356 citations
Cited by
More filters
01 Jan 2010
TL;DR: Since the publication of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD) practice guidelines on the management of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in 2005, new information has emerged that requires that the guidelines be updated.
Abstract: Since the publication of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD) practice guidelines on the management of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in 2005, new information has emerged that requires that the guidelines be updated. The full version of the new guidelines is available on the AASLD Web site at http://www.aasld.org/practiceguidelines/ Documents/Bookmarked%20Practice%20Guidelines/ HCCUpdate2010.pdf. Here, we briefly describe only new or changed recommendations.
6,642 citations
TL;DR: A 2-day consensus conference on acute renal failure (ARF) in critically ill patients was organized by ADQI as discussed by the authors, where the authors sought to review the available evidence, make recommendations and delineate key questions for future studies.
Abstract: There is no consensus definition of acute renal failure (ARF) in critically ill patients. More than 30 different definitions have been used in the literature, creating much confusion and making comparisons difficult. Similarly, strong debate exists on the validity and clinical relevance of animal models of ARF; on choices of fluid management and of end-points for trials of new interventions in this field; and on how information technology can be used to assist this process. Accordingly, we sought to review the available evidence, make recommendations and delineate key questions for future studies. We undertook a systematic review of the literature using Medline and PubMed searches. We determined a list of key questions and convened a 2-day consensus conference to develop summary statements via a series of alternating breakout and plenary sessions. In these sessions, we identified supporting evidence and generated recommendations and/or directions for future research. We found sufficient consensus on 47 questions to allow the development of recommendations. Importantly, we were able to develop a consensus definition for ARF. In some cases it was also possible to issue useful consensus recommendations for future investigations. We present a summary of the findings. (Full versions of the six workgroups' findings are available on the internet at http://www.ADQI.net
) Despite limited data, broad areas of consensus exist for the physiological and clinical principles needed to guide the development of consensus recommendations for defining ARF, selection of animal models, methods of monitoring fluid therapy, choice of physiological and clinical end-points for trials, and the possible role of information technology.
6,072 citations
TL;DR: The prevention of Cirrhosis can prevent the development of HCC and progression from chronic HCV infection to advanced fibrosis or cirrhosis may be prevented in 40% of patients who are sustained responders to new antiviral strategies, such as pegylated interferon and ribavirin.
5,557 citations
TL;DR: The MELD scale is a reliable measure of mortality risk in patients with end‐stage liver disease and suitable for use as a disease severity index to determine organ allocation priorities in patient groups with a broader range of disease severity and etiology.
4,184 citations
TL;DR: Data suggest that the MELD score is able to accurately predict 3-month mortality among patients with chronic liver disease on the liver waiting list and can be applied for allocation of donor livers.
2,225 citations