Association of Imaging-based Skeletal Muscle Metrics, Biochemical Markers, and MELD Score with Liver Transplant Complications and Survival: Insights from a Single-Center Cross-sectional Study
Novelty in Biomedicine,
Vol. 14 No. 1 (2026),
8 February 2026
,
Page 41-48
https://doi.org/10.22037/nbm.v14i1.49634
Abstract
Background: Identifying pre-transplant predictors of postoperative complications and survival following liver transplantation can improve patient outcomes and resource allocation. This study aimed to assess the predictive role of laboratory biomarkers and imaging-based parameters in post-transplant complications and patient survival.
Materials and Methods: In this cross-sectional study, data from patients aged 17–75 years undergoing liver transplantation from deceased donors between October 2019 and December 2023 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients with malignancy, cardiovascular diseases, living donor transplants, or incomplete data were excluded. Preoperative clinical variables included demographics, MELD score, vascular features, biochemical laboratory parameters, and imaging-based muscle metrics (Skeletal Muscle Area, Skeletal Muscle Index, Skeletal Muscle Radiodensity Assessment, myosteatosis). Postoperative complications, survival status, and associated predictors were evaluated using appropriate statistical tests.
Results: Of 79 patients (mean age 49.4 ± 12.2 years, 58.2% male), complications occurred in 39 (49.4%). Male sex (p=0.015) and lower SMRA (p=0.008) were significantly associated with postoperative complications. Patients who died had substantially higher MELD scores (23.3 ± 10.6) than survivors (17.3 ± 7.7; p=0.037). Portosystemic collaterals were significantly less frequent among patients with complications (23% vs. 50%, p=0.019). Routine biochemical laboratory parameters, SMA, SMI, myosteatosis, and vascular diameters were not significantly associated with outcomes. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis demonstrated an 85% survival rate at one year, with mortality primarily occurring within the first three months post-transplant.
Conclusion: Pre-transplant MELD score tends to predict survival, whereas lower SMRA, male sex, and the absence of portosystemic collaterals may predict postoperative complications. Identifying these factors can enhance risk stratification and perioperative management in liver transplant recipients.
- Deceased donor liver transplantation
- Overall survival
- Liver transplant complications
- SMRA
- Skeletal Muscle Metrics
How to Cite
References
1. Finotti M, Auricchio P, Vitale A, Gringeri E, Cillo U. Liver transplantation for rare liver diseases and rare indications for liver transplant. Transl Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2020;6.
2. Adam R, Karam V, Cailliez V, et al. 2018 Annual report of the European Liver Transplant Registry (ELTR): 50-year evolution of liver transplantation. Transpl Int. 2018;31:1293-317.
3. United Network for Organ Sharing. Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network. 2019. Available from: https://unos.org
4. Shin EM, Westhaver L, Nersesian S, Boudreau JE, Gala-Lopez BL. Predicting early graft dysfunction and mortality after liver transplant using the De Ritis ratio. Transplant Proc. 2023;55:586-96.
5. Gadour E. Lessons learnt from 60 years of liver transplantation: advancements, challenges, and future directions. World J Transplant. 2025;15:93253.
6. Li C, Jiang X, Zhang K. A transformer-based deep learning approach for fairly predicting post-liver transplant risk factors. J Biomed Inform. 2024;149:104545.
7. Parent B, Caplan AL. Fair is fair: we must re-allocate livers for transplant. BMC Med Ethics. 2017;18:26.
8. Davuluri G, Allawy A, Thapaliya S, et al. Hyperammonaemia-induced skeletal muscle mitochondrial dysfunction results in cataplerosis and oxidative stress. J Physiol. 2016;594:7341-60.
9. Di Cola S, D’Amico G, Caraceni P, et al. Myosteatosis is closely associated with sarcopenia and significantly worse outcomes in patients with cirrhosis. J Hepatol. 2024;81:641-50.
10. Kalafateli M, Mantzoukis K, Choi Yau Y, et al. Malnutrition and sarcopenia predict post-liver transplantation outcomes independently of the model for end-stage liver disease score. J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle. 2017;8:113-21.
11. Christodoulidis G, Tsagkidou K, Bartzi D, et al. Sarcopenia and frailty: an in-depth analysis of the pathophysiology and effect on liver transplant candidates. World J Hepatol. 2025;17:106182.
12. Craig EV, Heller MT. Complications of liver transplant. Abdom Radiol (NY). 2021;46:43-67.
13. Lu D, Hu Z, Chen H, et al. Myosteatosis and muscle loss impact liver transplant outcomes in male patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle. 2024;15:2071-83.
14. Ebadi M, Tsien C, Bhanji RA, et al. Skeletal muscle pathological fat infiltration (myosteatosis) is associated with higher mortality in patients with cirrhosis. Cells. 2022;11:1345.
15. Chen H, Hu Z, Xu Q, et al. The adverse impact of perioperative body composition abnormalities on outcomes after split liver transplantation: a multicenter retrospective cohort study. Int J Surg. 2024;110:3543-53.
16. Bot D, Klerks S, Leistra E, Tushuizen ME, van Hoek B. Association between skeletal muscle index prior to liver transplantation and 1-year mortality posttransplant. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2023;47:867-77.
17. Czigany Z, Kramp W, Lurje I, et al. The role of recipient myosteatosis in graft and patient survival after deceased donor liver transplantation. J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle. 2021;12:358-67.
18. Kyselova D, Mikova I, Sedivy P, et al. Skeletal muscle 31P MR spectroscopy surpasses CT in predicting patient survival after liver transplantation. J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle. 2025;16:e13635.
19. Schaapman J, Shumbayawonda E, Castelo-Branco M, et al. MRI-serum–based score accurately identifies patients undergoing liver transplant without rejection, avoiding the need for liver biopsy: a multisite European study. Liver Transpl. 2025;31:355-68.
20. Hussein MM, Abdelwahab SM, Dabbous H, Montasser IF, Al-Banna WM. Correlation between MELD scoring system prior living donor liver transplantation and occurrence of post-transplant biliary complications. QJM. 2023;116.
21. Wronka KM, Grąt M, Stypułkowski J, et al. Liver transplantation outcomes in recipients with high model for end-stage liver disease scores: the relevance of MELD scores. Ann Transplant. 2017;22:251-6.
22. Pommergaard HC, Daugaard TR, Rostved AA, et al. Model for end-stage liver disease score predicts complications after liver transplantation. Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2021;406:55-65.
23. Matoba D, Noda T, Kobayashi S, et al. Analysis of short-term and long-term outcomes of living donor liver transplantation for patients with a high model for end-stage liver disease score. Transplant Proc. 2023;55:893-7.
24. Hohenreuther R, Silveira AT, Filho EMR, et al. Physiology and health assessment, risk balance, and model for end-stage liver disease scores: postoperative outcome of liver transplantation. World J Transplant. 2025;15:95899.
25. Shafaat O, Liu Y, Jackson KR, et al. Association between abdominal CT measurements of body composition before deceased donor liver transplant and posttransplant outcomes. Radiology. 2023;306:e212403.
26. Huang Y, Wang N, Xu L, et al. Albumin–globulin score combined with skeletal muscle index as a novel prognostic marker for hepatocellular carcinoma patients undergoing liver transplantation. J Clin Med. 2023;12:2237.
- Abstract Viewed: 39 times
- pdf Downloaded: 29 times