Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Comparison of the Charlson comorbidity index, the modified Charlson comorbidity index, and the recipient risk score in prediction of the graft and patient survival among renal graft recipients: historical cohort in a single center

  • Urology - Original Paper
  • Published:
International Urology and Nephrology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

To compare the predictive values of Charlson comorbidity index (CCI), modified Charlson comorbidity index kidney transplant (mCCI-KT) and recipient risk score (RRS) indices in prediction of patient and graft survival in kidney transplant patients.

Methods

In this retrospective study, all patients who underwent a live-donor KT from 2006 to 2010, were included. Demographic data, comorbidities and survival time after KT were extracted and the association between above indices with patient and graft survival were compared.

Results

In ROC curve analysis of 715 included patients, all three indicators were weak in predicting graft rejection with the area under curve (AUC) less than 0.6. The best models for predicting the overall survival were mCCI-KT and CCI with AUC of 0.827 and 0.780, respectively. Sensitivity and specificity of mCCI-KT at cut point of 1 were 87.2 and 75.6. Sensitivity and specificity of CCI at cut point of 3 were 84.6 and 68.3 and for RRS at cut point of 3 were 51.3 and 81.2, respectively.

Conclusion

The mCCI-KT index followed by the CCI index provided the best model in predicting the 10-year patient survival; however, they were poor in predicting graft survival and this model can be used for better stratifying transplant candidates prior to surgery.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Schold JD et al (2014) Association between kidney transplant center performance and the survival benefit of transplantation versus dialysis. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 9(10):1773–1780

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Pieloch D et al (2015) The Kidney Transplant Morbidity Index (KTMI): a simple prognostic tool to help determine outcome risk in kidney transplant candidates. Prog Transplant 25(1):70–76

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Fried L, Bernardini J, Piraino B (2001) Charlson comorbidity index as a predictor of outcomes in incident peritoneal dialysis patients. Am J Kidney Dis 37(2):337–342

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. van Manen JG et al (2002) How to adjust for comorbidity in survival studies in ESRD patients: a comparison of different indices. Am J Kidney Dis 40(1):82–89

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Hemmelgarn BR et al (2003) Adapting the Charlson Comorbidity Index for use in patients with ESRD. Am J Kidney Dis 42(1):125–132

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Wright LF (1991) Survival in patients with end-stage renal disease. Am J Kidney Dis 17(1):25–28

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Khan IH et al (1993) Influence of coexisting disease on survival on renal-replacement therapy. Lancet 341(8842):415–418

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Davies SJ et al (1995) Comorbidity, urea kinetics, and appetite in continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis patients: their interrelationship and prediction of survival. Am J Kidney Dis 26(2):353–361

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Foley RN et al (1994) Advance prediction of early death in patients starting maintenance dialysis. Am J Kidney Dis 23(6):836–845

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Baskin-Bey ES, Kremers W, Nyberg SL (2007) A recipient risk score for deceased donor renal allocation. Am J Kidney Dis 49(2):284–293

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Baskin-Bey ES, Nyberg SL (2008) Matching graft to recipient by predicted survival: can this be an acceptable strategy to improve utilization of deceased donor kidneys? Transplant Rev (Orlando) 22(3):167–170

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Moore J et al (2011) Mortality prediction after kidney transplantation: comparative clinical use of 7 comorbidity indices. Exp Clin Transplant 9(1):32–41

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Park JY et al (2018) Comorbidities can predict mortality of kidney transplant recipients: comparison with the Charlson Comorbidity Index. Transplantation proceedings. Elsevier, Amsterdam

    Google Scholar 

  14. Hallan SI et al (2006) International comparison of the relationship of chronic kidney disease prevalence and ESRD risk. J Am Soc Nephrol 17(8):2275–2284

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Grassmann A et al (2005) ESRD patients in 2004: global overview of patient numbers, treatment modalities and associated trends. Nephrol Dial Transplant 20(12):2587–2593

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Charlson ME et al (1987) A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chronic Dis 40(5):373–383

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Pirsch JD et al (1996) Determinants of graft survival after renal transplantation. Transplantation 61(11):1581–1586

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. O’Shaughnessy EA et al (2002) Risk factors for fractures in kidney transplantation. Transplantation 74(3):362–366

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Grosso G et al (2012) Predictive value of the Charlson comorbidity index in kidney transplantation. Transplantation proceedings. Elsevier, Amsterdam

    Google Scholar 

  20. Jassal SV, Schaubel DE, Fenton SS (2005) Baseline comorbidity in kidney transplant recipients: a comparison of comorbidity indices. Am J Kidney Dis 46(1):136–142

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Hirsch HH (2002) Polyomavirus BK nephropathy: a (re-)emerging complication in renal transplantation. Am J Transplant 2(1):25–30

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Hirsch HH et al (2005) Polyomavirus-associated nephropathy in renal transplantation: interdisciplinary analyses and recommendations. Transplantation 79(10):1277–1286

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Fried L, Bernardini J, Piraino B (2003) Comparison of the Charlson comorbidity index and the Davies score as a predictor of outcomes in PD patients. Perit Dial Int 23(6):568–573

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Rius C et al (2004) An adaptation of Charlson comorbidity index predicted subsequent mortality in a health survey. J Clin Epidemiol 57(4):403–408

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. McArthur E et al (2018) Comparing five comorbidity indices to predict mortality in chronic kidney disease: a retrospective cohort study. Can J Kidney Health Dis 5:2054358118805418

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Krikov S et al (2007) Predicting kidney transplant survival using tree-based modeling. Asaio J 53(5):592–600

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Djaladat H et al (2014) The association of preoperative serum albumin level and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score on early complications and survival of patients undergoing radical cystectomy for urothelial bladder cancer. BJU Int 113(6):887–893

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

No fund was received.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, Shahid Modarres Hospital, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

    Navid Masoumi

  2. Urology-Nephrology Research Center, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

    Majed Ghaffari & Majid Ali Asgari

  3. Urology and Nephrology Research Center, Shahid Labbafinejad Medical Center, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, 9th Boostan, Pasdaran Avenue, Tehran, 1666663111, Iran

    Mehdi Dadpour

Authors
  1. Navid Masoumi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Majed Ghaffari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Majid Ali Asgari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Mehdi Dadpour
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mehdi Dadpour.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interests

All the authors declare that they have no conflict of interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 18 KB)

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Masoumi, N., Ghaffari, M., Asgari, M.A. et al. Comparison of the Charlson comorbidity index, the modified Charlson comorbidity index, and the recipient risk score in prediction of the graft and patient survival among renal graft recipients: historical cohort in a single center. Int Urol Nephrol 55, 2447–2456 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-023-03670-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-023-03670-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation