Zhang Ke, Xu Hao, Zu Maoheng, Wei Ning
Department of Interventional Radiology, Affiliated Hospital of Xuzhou Medical College, Xuzhou 221006, China. E-mail:
Nan Fang Yi Ke Da Xue Xue Bao. 2014 Jan;34(1):88-91.
To compare the predictive value of 5 prognostic models (Child-Pugh scoring, Clichy prognostic index [PI], New Clichy PI, Rotterdam BCS index, and BCS-TIPS PI) for Budd-Chiari syndrome (BCS) in China.
The clinical data of 123 patients with BCS were retrospectively analyzed, among whom 99 survived and 24 died. The indices of the 5 prognostic models were respectively calculated, and each index was compared by F-test between the survival and death groups. The area under curve (AUC), sensitivity, and specificity of the models were computed and analyzed by receiver-operator characteristic (ROC) curve.
The indices of Child-Pugh, Clichy, New Clichy and Rotterdam BCS Index models in the death group (8.792∓2.0, 5.924∓0.783, 5.695∓1.81, and 0.615∓1.133, respectively) were significantly higher than those in the survival group (7.141∓1.443, 5.221∓0.834, 3.981∓1.033, and -0.148∓0.896, respectively, P<0.01), and only BCS-TIPS model had no significant difference between the two groups (P>0.05). The AUC of the 5 indices were 0.738, 0.720, 0.776, 0.721, and 0.502, with Youden indices of 0.370, 0.410, 0.439, 0.473, and 0.051, respectively.
Child-Pugh scoring, Clichy PI, New Clichy PI, and Rotterdam BCS Index models can distinguish survival from death in BCS patients in China. New Clichy PI has the highest predictive value and is suitable for use in China, whereas the other models have relatively low predictive values, among which BCS-TIPS model is not advisable. Meanwhile effort should be made to establish a prognostic model for BCS in China.
比较5种预后模型（Child-Pugh评分、克利希预后指数[PI]、新克利希PI、鹿特丹布加综合征指数[BCS指数]和BCS-经颈静脉肝内门体分流术PI）对中国布加综合征（BCS）的预测价值。
回顾性分析123例BCS患者的临床资料，其中99例存活，24例死亡。分别计算5种预后模型的各项指标，采用F检验比较存活组和死亡组各项指标的差异。通过受试者工作特征（ROC）曲线计算并分析各模型的曲线下面积（AUC）、敏感度和特异度。
Child-Pugh、克利希、新克利希和鹿特丹BCS指数模型在死亡组的指标（分别为8.792±2.0、5.924±0.783、5.695±1.81和0.615±1.133）显著高于存活组（分别为7.141±1.443、5.221±0.834、3.981±1.033和-0.148±0.896，P<0.01），只有BCS-经颈静脉肝内门体分流术模型在两组间无显著差异（P>0.05）。5项指标的AUC分别为0.738、0.720、0.776、0.721和0.502，约登指数分别为0.370、0.410、0.439、0.473和0.051。
Child-Pugh评分、克利希PI、新克利希PI和鹿特丹BCS指数模型可区分中国BCS患者的存活与死亡情况。新克利希PI的预测价值最高，适用于中国，而其他模型的预测价值相对较低，其中BCS-经颈静脉肝内门体分流术模型不可取。同时，应努力建立适合中国的BCS预后模型。
