Department of Medicine (DIMED), University of Padova, Italy Unit of Hepatic Emergencies and Liver Transplantation, Padova, Italy.
Liver Unit, Hospital Clinic de Barcelona, University of Barcelona, Spain Institut d'Investigacions Biomediques Agust Pi i Sunyer (IDIBAPS), Barcelona, Spain Fundación Renal Iñigo Alvarez de Toledo, (FRIAT), Madrid, Spain.
Gut. 2015 Oct;64(10):1616-22. doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2014-307526. Epub 2014 Oct 13.
Prognostic stratification of patients with cirrhosis is common clinical practice. This study compares the prognostic accuracy (28-day and 90-day transplant-free mortality) of the acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) classification (no ACLF, ACLF grades 1, 2 and 3) with that of acute kidney injury (AKI) classification (no AKI, AKI stages 1, 2 and 3).
The study was performed in 510 patients with an acute decompensation of cirrhosis previously included in the European Association for the Study of the Liver-Chronic Liver Failure consortium CANONIC study. ACLF was evaluated at enrollment and 48 h after enrollment, and AKI was evaluated at 48 h according to Acute Kidney Injury Network criteria.
240 patients (47.1%) met the criteria of ACLF at enrollment, while 98 patients (19.2%) developed AKI. The presence of ACLF and AKI was strongly associated with mortality. 28-day transplant-free mortality and 90-day transplant-free mortality of patients with ACLF (32% and 49.8%, respectively) were significantly higher with respect to those of patients without ACLF (6.2% and 16.4%, respectively; both p<0.001). Corresponding values in patients with and without AKI were 46% and 59%, and 12% and 25.6%, respectively (p<0.0001 for both). ACLF classification was more accurate than AKI classification in predicting 90-day mortality (area under the receiving operating characteristic curve=0.72 vs 0.62; p<0.0001) in the whole series of patients. Moreover, assessment of ACLF classification at 48 h had significantly better prognostic accuracy compared with that of both AKI classification and ACLF classification at enrollment.
ACLF stratification is more accurate than AKI stratification in the prediction of short-term mortality in patients with acute decompensation of cirrhosis.
对肝硬化患者进行预后分层是常见的临床实践。本研究比较了慢性肝衰竭急性加重(ACLF)分类(无 ACLF、ACLF 分级 1、2 和 3)与急性肾损伤(AKI)分类(无 AKI、AKI 分期 1、2 和 3)在预测预后(28 天和 90 天无移植死亡率)方面的准确性。
这项研究纳入了之前参加欧洲肝脏研究协会-慢性肝衰竭联盟 CANONIC 研究的 510 例急性肝功能失代偿的肝硬化患者。ACLF 在登记时和登记后 48 小时进行评估,AKI 根据急性肾损伤网络标准在 48 小时进行评估。
240 例患者(47.1%)在登记时符合 ACLF 标准,98 例患者(19.2%)发生 AKI。ACLF 和 AKI 的存在与死亡率密切相关。ACLF 患者的 28 天无移植死亡率和 90 天无移植死亡率(分别为 32%和 49.8%)显著高于无 ACLF 患者(分别为 6.2%和 16.4%;均<0.001)。AKI 患者的相应数值分别为 46%和 59%,12%和 25.6%(均<0.0001)。在整个患者系列中,ACLF 分类在预测 90 天死亡率方面比 AKI 分类更准确(接受者操作特征曲线下面积=0.72 与 0.62;p<0.0001)。此外,与 AKI 分类和登记时的 ACLF 分类相比,48 小时时 ACLF 分类的预后评估准确性显著提高。
在预测急性肝功能失代偿患者的短期死亡率方面,ACLF 分层比 AKI 分层更准确。