Reddy K Rajender, Ellerbe Caitlyn, Schilsky Michael, Stravitz R Todd, Fontana Robert J, Durkalski Valerie, Lee William M
Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA.
Division of Biostatistics, Department of Public Health Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC.
Liver Transpl. 2016 Apr;22(4):505-15. doi: 10.1002/lt.24347.
Analyses of outcomes after acute liver failure (ALF) have typically included all ALF patients regardless of whether they were listed for liver transplantation (LT). We hypothesized that limiting analysis to listed patients might provide novel insights into factors associated with outcome, focusing attention on disease evolution after listing. Listed adult ALF patients enrolled in the US Acute Liver Failure Study Group registry between 2000 and 2013 were analyzed to determine baseline factors associated with 21-day outcomes after listing. We classified 617 patients (36% of overall ALF group) by 3-week outcome after study admission: 117 were spontaneous survivors (SSs; survival without LT), 108 died without LT, and 392 underwent LT. Only 22% of N-acetyl-p-aminophenol (APAP) ALF patients were listed; however, this group of 173 patients demonstrated greater illness severity: higher coma grades and more patients requiring ventilator, vasopressor, or renal replacement therapy support. Only 62/173 (36%) of APAP patients received a graft versus 66% for drug-induced liver injury patients, 86% for autoimmune-related ALF, and 71% for hepatitis B-related ALF. APAP patients were more likely to die than non-APAP patients (24% versus 17%), and the median time to death was sooner (2 versus 4.5 days). Despite greater severity of illness, the listed APAP group still had a SS rate of 40% versus 11% for non-APAP causes (P < 0.001). APAP outcomes evolve rapidly, mainly to SS or death. Patients with APAP ALF listed for LT had the highest death rate of any etiology, whereas more slowly evolving etiologies yielded higher LT rates and, consequently, fewer deaths. Decisions to list and transplant must be made early in all ALF patients, particularly in those with APAP ALF.
急性肝衰竭(ALF)预后分析通常纳入所有ALF患者,无论其是否被列入肝移植(LT)名单。我们推测,将分析局限于列入名单的患者可能会为与预后相关的因素提供新见解,将注意力集中在列入名单后的疾病演变上。对2000年至2013年期间在美国急性肝衰竭研究组登记处登记的成年列入名单的ALF患者进行分析,以确定与列入名单后21天预后相关的基线因素。我们根据研究入院后3周的预后将617例患者(占整个ALF组的36%)进行分类:117例为自然存活者(SSs;未进行LT而存活),108例未进行LT死亡,392例接受了LT。对乙酰氨基酚(APAP)所致ALF患者中只有22%被列入名单;然而,这组173例患者病情更严重:昏迷分级更高,更多患者需要呼吸机、血管升压药或肾脏替代治疗支持。APAP患者中只有62/173(36%)接受了移植,而药物性肝损伤患者为66%,自身免疫相关ALF患者为86%,乙型肝炎相关ALF患者为71%。APAP患者比非APAP患者更易死亡(24%对17%),中位死亡时间更早(2天对4.5天)。尽管病情更严重,但列入名单的APAP组自然存活率仍为40%,而非APAP病因组为11%(P < 0.001)。APAP的预后迅速演变,主要为自然存活或死亡。因LT而列入名单的APAP所致ALF患者在所有病因中死亡率最高,而病情演变较慢的病因LT率更高,因此死亡人数更少。所有ALF患者,尤其是APAP所致ALF患者,必须尽早做出列入名单和移植的决定。