Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2022 Aug 29.
Published in final edited form as: Clin Transplant. 2020 Dec 29;35(2):e14190. doi: 10.1111/ctr.14190

Table 4.

Relationship Between Karnofsky Performance Status and Clinical Outcomes of SLKT Recipients (Cohort 2)

Unadjusted Effect Size Adjusted Effect Size*

Post-transplant length of stay
 Karnofsky A 1 (Ref) 1 (Ref)
 Karnofsky B 1.07 (1.00–1.14) 1.04 (0.98–1.12)
 Karnofsky C 1.53 (1.43–1.63) 1.18 (1.10–1.27)

Liver graft loss
 Karnofsky A 1 (Ref) 1 (Ref)
 Karnofsky B 1.09 (0.92–1.30) 1.13 (0.95–1.35)
 Karnofsky C 1.31 (1.11–1.54) 1.33 (1.10–1.61)

Kidney graft loss
 Karnofsky A 1 (Ref) 1 (Ref)
 Karnofsky B 1.08 (0.92–1.27) 1.12 (0.95–1.32)
 Karnofsky C 1.33 (1.14–1.55) 1.35 (1.13–1.62)

Patient mortality
 Karnofsky A 1 (Ref) 1 (Ref)
 Karnofsky B 1.09 (0.92–1.31) 1.26 (0.94–1.35)
 Karnofsky C 1.32 (1.12–1.56) 1.32 (1.08–1.61)

Length of stay is presented as ratio of geometric means. Graft loss and patient mortality are presented as hazard ratios.

*

Adjusted for Sex, Race/Ethnicity, Dialysis, MELD, Diabetes, Albumin, Ascites, Encephalopathy, Medical Condition at Transplant, Cirrhosis Etiology, HCC, Region, Transplant Year