What is the purpose and interpretation of the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) scoring system in assessing liver disease severity?

Medical Advisory BoardAll articles are reviewed for accuracy by our Medical Advisory Board
Educational purpose only • Exercise caution as content is pending human review
Article Review Status
Submitted
Under Review
Approved

Last updated: August 30, 2025View editorial policy

Personalize

Help us tailor your experience

Which best describes you? Your choice helps us use language that's most understandable for you.

The Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) Scoring System

The MELD score is primarily designed to predict short-term (3-month) mortality in patients with end-stage liver disease and serves as the cornerstone for liver transplant allocation, prioritizing the sickest patients based on objective laboratory parameters rather than waiting time. 1

Components and Calculation

The MELD score is calculated using three objective laboratory parameters:

  • Serum bilirubin (mg/dL)
  • Serum creatinine (mg/dL)
  • International Normalized Ratio (INR)

The formula is: MELD Score = 3.78 × log(bilirubin) + 11.2 × log(INR) + 9.6 × log(creatinine) + 6.4 1

Interpretation and Mortality Risk

The MELD score correlates directly with mortality risk, with higher scores indicating increased risk of death:

MELD Score 3-Month Mortality Risk
6-9 1.9%
10-19 6%
20-29 19.6%
30-39 52.6%
40+ 71.3%

1, 2

Clinical Applications

1. Liver Transplantation Allocation

  • Primary use is prioritizing patients on the liver transplant waiting list
  • Implemented in 2002, leading to reduced waiting list mortality without affecting post-transplant outcomes 3
  • Minimum threshold of MELD ≥15 is recommended for listing patients for transplantation 1
  • Benefits of transplantation typically emerge when MELD exceeds 14 1

2. Prognostic Tool in Various Clinical Scenarios

The MELD score effectively predicts outcomes in:

  • Variceal bleeding
  • Hepatorenal syndrome
  • Alcoholic hepatitis
  • Acute liver failure
  • Risk assessment for non-transplant surgery in cirrhotic patients
  • Risk assessment for TIPS (transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt) procedures 4

Advantages Over Other Scoring Systems

  • More objective than Child-Turcotte-Pugh (CTP) score, which includes subjective clinical parameters (encephalopathy and ascites)
  • Superior for predicting short-term (3-month) mortality
  • More sensitive dynamic range than CTP score
  • Uses only laboratory values, eliminating subjectivity 1, 2

Limitations and Considerations

  1. Fails to predict mortality in approximately 15% of patients with end-stage liver disease 4

  2. Cannot accurately gauge severity in certain conditions:

    • MELD exceptions (conditions where laboratory values don't reflect disease severity)
    • Hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with compensated cirrhosis 5
  3. Laboratory variability issues:

    • Inter-laboratory differences can affect MELD calculation
    • Variations of up to 5 MELD points have been documented between different laboratories 6
  4. May not capture risk in specific populations:

    • Female patients may have worse outcomes than males with the same MELD score 1

Monitoring Recommendations

  • Calculate MELD score every 6 months in stable patients
  • More frequent monitoring (every 1-3 months) in patients showing clinical deterioration
  • Consider transplant evaluation when MELD score ≥15 or when major complications of cirrhosis occur 1

Potential Improvements

Several modifications have been proposed to enhance MELD's accuracy:

  • Addition of serum sodium (MELD-Na)
  • Incorporation of serum albumin
  • Assessment of glucose intolerance
  • Addition of APACHE II score
  • Evaluation of MELD changes over time 4, 3

The MELD score represents a significant advancement in objectively assessing liver disease severity and has transformed liver allocation systems worldwide, though ongoing refinements continue to address its limitations.

Professional Medical Disclaimer

This information is intended for healthcare professionals. Any medical decision-making should rely on clinical judgment and independently verified information. The content provided herein does not replace professional discretion and should be considered supplementary to established clinical guidelines. Healthcare providers should verify all information against primary literature and current practice standards before application in patient care. Dr.Oracle assumes no liability for clinical decisions based on this content.

Have a follow-up question?

Our Medical A.I. is used by practicing medical doctors at top research institutions around the world. Ask any follow up question and get world-class guideline-backed answers instantly.