Suppr超能文献

两种经验证的评分系统在评估儿童肠衰竭相关肝病和等待肝移植的肝病患儿死亡率风险方面的比较。

A comparison of two validated scores for estimating risk of mortality of children with intestinal failure associated liver disease and those with liver disease awaiting transplantation.

机构信息

The Liver Unit, Birmingham Children's Hospital, Birmingham B4 6NH, United Kingdom.

The Institute of Child Health, Birmingham Children's Hospital, Birmingham B4 6NH, United Kingdom.

出版信息

Clin Res Hepatol Gastroenterol. 2014 Feb;38(1):32-9. doi: 10.1016/j.clinre.2013.06.001. Epub 2013 Jul 12.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

To evaluate risk of mortality in children with intestinal failure associated liver disease (IFALD) compared with other liver disease using two validated scores.

METHODS

Sixty-seven children listed for transplant were studied: cholestatic liver disease (CLDn23); liver disease secondary to other processes (LDsec n11); (IFALDn22), acute liver failure (ALFn11). Paediatric Hepatology Score (PHD) score and Pediatric end-stage liver disease score (PELD) were evaluated by Receiver Operating Curves (ROC), proportional hazards regression.

RESULTS

The highest PHD and PELD scores were found in ALF; the lowest in LDsec. Both scores correlated well in identifying waiting list (WL) mortality in patients with CLD and ALF, but not in those with IFALD where PELD scores were lower. Cox proportional hazard regression of time spent on the waiting list prior to death or transplant/delisting showed significant associations with PHD (P=0.006) and PELD (P=0.008). WL mortality was strongly predicted by disease group (6/8 deaths in IFALD). ROC analysis of all data showed that a PHD score greater than 15.5 had sensitivity of 87.5% and specificity of 81% for waiting list mortality (P<0.001); PELD greater than 8 had a sensitivity of 87.5% and specificity of 40%. Neither PHD nor PELD scores correlated with post-transplant mortality.

CONCLUSION

PHD and PELD scores had the same sensitivity for identifying risk of WL mortality in all patients, but PELD failed to identify the sickest children with IFALD, lowering its specificity. The PHD score has the added advantage for European centres of being in SI units, not requiring a computer application to calculate and was simpler to use at bedside.

摘要

背景和目的

使用两种经过验证的评分来评估与其他肝病相比,患有肠衰竭相关肝病(IFALD)的儿童的死亡率风险。

方法

研究了 67 名列入移植名单的儿童:胆汁淤积性肝病(CLDn23);由其他过程引起的肝病(LDsec n11);(IFALDn22),急性肝衰竭(ALFn11)。通过接收者操作曲线(ROC)和比例风险回归评估小儿肝病评分(PHD)评分和小儿终末期肝病评分(PELD)。

结果

ALF 中发现的 PHD 和 PELD 评分最高;LDsec 中发现的最低。这两个评分在识别 CLD 和 ALF 患者的等待名单(WL)死亡率方面相关性良好,但在 IFALD 患者中相关性不佳,后者的 PELD 评分较低。在死亡或移植/除名前在等待名单上花费的时间的 Cox 比例风险回归显示与 PHD(P=0.006)和 PELD(P=0.008)有显著关联。疾病组强烈预测 WL 死亡率(IFALD 中有 6/8 例死亡)。对所有数据的 ROC 分析表明,PHD 评分大于 15.5 时,等待名单死亡率的敏感性为 87.5%,特异性为 81%(P<0.001);PELD 大于 8 时,敏感性为 87.5%,特异性为 40%。PHD 和 PELD 评分均与移植后死亡率无关。

结论

PHD 和 PELD 评分对识别所有患者 WL 死亡率风险具有相同的敏感性,但 PELD 未能识别出最严重的 IFALD 患儿,降低了其特异性。PHD 评分在欧洲中心的优势在于它使用 SI 单位,不需要计算机应用程序进行计算,并且在床边使用更简单。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验