Suppr超能文献

急性肝衰竭的预后标准:是时候重新审视了。

Acute Liver Failure Prognostic Criteria: It's Time to Revisit.

作者信息

Goel Amit, Lalruatsanga David, Himanshu D, Bharti Vipin, Sharma Deepak

机构信息

Gastroenterology, Sanjay Gandhi Postgraduate Institute of Medical Sciences (SGPGI), Lucknow, IND.

Internal Medicine, Zoram Medical College, Mizoram, IND.

出版信息

Cureus. 2023 Jan 16;15(1):e33810. doi: 10.7759/cureus.33810. eCollection 2023 Jan.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Acute liver failure (ALF) is a devastating disease, and patients are at a higher risk of death without liver transplantation. Indicators are needed to identify the risk of death in ALF, which will help in the timely referral of patients to specialized centers. Clichy criteriaand King's College Hospital (KCH) criteria are the most widely used prognostic criteria. Real-life application of Clichy criteria is limited due to the non-availability of factor V level measurement. KCH criteria have good specificity but low sensitivity to predict outcomes. Therefore, we attempted to use the model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score and chronic liver failure-sequential organ failure assessment (CLIF-SOFA) score in ALF patients as prognostic indicators and need for liver transplantation.

METHODS

Forty-one patients with ALF were enrolled in the study. On the day of admission, MELD and CLIF-SOFA scores were calculated for each patient. Area under receiver operating characteristics (AUROC) curve, sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value (NPV), positive predictive value (PPV), and diagnostic accuracy (DA) of MELD and CLIF-SOFA score were calculated to predict the outcome of the patients.

RESULTS

Out of 41 patients, nine patients left against medical advice. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and DA for the MELD score of enrolled patients in the study were 81.5%, 62.5%, 59.5%, 83.3%, 70.1%, and for the CLIF-SOFA score of enrolled patients in the study were 88.9%, 90.0%, 85.7%, 92.3%, 89.6% respectively. Patients who did not survive had higher INR, MELD, CLIF-SOFA scores, and hepatic encephalopathy (HE) grades. Five patients who had a combination of MELD ≥30 and CLIF-SOFA ≥10, expired.

CONCLUSION

In our study, we used MELD score and CLIF-SOFA as prognostic markers, and we concluded that CLIF-SOFA is a better predictor of mortality than MELD score in terms of sensitivity, specificity, NPV, PPV, and diagnostic accuracy. AUROC for CLIF-SOFA score is higher when compared to the MELD score.

摘要

引言

急性肝衰竭(ALF)是一种严重的疾病,若不进行肝移植,患者死亡风险更高。需要一些指标来识别ALF患者的死亡风险,这将有助于及时将患者转诊至专科中心。克利希标准和国王学院医院(KCH)标准是应用最广泛的预后标准。由于无法检测凝血因子V水平,克利希标准在实际应用中受到限制。KCH标准具有良好的特异性,但预测预后的敏感性较低。因此,我们尝试将终末期肝病模型(MELD)评分和慢性肝衰竭序贯器官衰竭评估(CLIF-SOFA)评分用于ALF患者,作为预后指标及肝移植需求的评估指标。

方法

41例ALF患者纳入本研究。入院当天,计算每位患者的MELD和CLIF-SOFA评分。计算MELD和CLIF-SOFA评分的受试者工作特征曲线下面积(AUROC)、敏感性、特异性、阴性预测值(NPV)、阳性预测值(PPV)及诊断准确性(DA),以预测患者的预后。

结果

41例患者中,9例患者自动出院。本研究中纳入患者的MELD评分的敏感性、特异性、PPV、NPV及DA分别为81.5%、62.5%、59.5%、83.3%、70.1%,CLIF-SOFA评分的敏感性、特异性、PPV、NPV及DA分别为88.9%、90.0%、85.7%、92.3%、89.6%。未存活患者的国际标准化比值(INR)、MELD、CLIF-SOFA评分及肝性脑病(HE)分级更高。5例MELD≥30且CLIF-SOFA≥10的患者死亡。

结论

在我们的研究中,我们将MELD评分和CLIF-SOFA作为预后标志物,我们得出结论,就敏感性、特异性、NPV、PPV和诊断准确性而言,CLIF-SOFA比MELD评分更能预测死亡率。与MELD评分相比,CLIF-SOFA评分的AUROC更高。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6ccf/9929612/891f1cccfbb6/cureus-0015-00000033810-i01.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验