View : 551 Download: 0

Validation of prognostic scores to predict short-term mortality in patients with acute-on-chronic liver failure

Title
Validation of prognostic scores to predict short-term mortality in patients with acute-on-chronic liver failure
Authors
Song D.S.Kim T.Y.Kim D.J.Kim H.Y.Sinn D.H.Yoon E.L.Kim C.W.Jung Y.K.Suk K.T.Lee S.S.Lee C.H.Kim T.H.Choe W.H.Yim H.J.Kim S.E.Baik S.K.Jang J.Y.Kim H.S.Kim S.G.Yang J.M.Sohn J.H.Choi E.H.Cho H.C.Jeong S.W.Kim M.Y.on behalf of the Korean Acute-on-Chronic Liver Failure (KACLiF) Study Group
Ewha Authors
김태헌김태훈
SCOPUS Author ID
김태헌scopusscopus
Issue Date
2018
Journal Title
Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (Australia)
ISSN
0815-9319JCR Link
Citation
Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (Australia) vol. 33, no. 4, pp. 900 - 909
Keywords
acute-on-chronic liver failureprognosisvalidation
Publisher
Blackwell Publishing
Indexed
SCIE; SCOPUS WOS scopus
Document Type
Article
Abstract
Background and Aim: The aim of this study was to validate the chronic liver failure-sequential organ failure assessment score (CLIF-SOFAs), CLIF consortium organ failure score (CLIF-C OFs), CLIF-C acute-on-chronic liver failure score (CLIF-C ACLFs), and CLIF-C acute decompensation score in Korean chronic liver disease patients with acute deterioration. Methods: Acute-on-chronic liver failure was defined by either the Asian Pacific Association for the study of the Liver ACLF Research Consortium (AARC) or CLIF-C criteria. The diagnostic performances for short-term mortality were compared by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. Results: Among a total of 1470 patients, 252 patients were diagnosed with ACLF according to the CLIF-C (197 patients) or AARC definition (95 patients). As the ACLF grades increased, the survival rates became significantly lower. The areas under the receiver operating characteristic of the CLIF-SOFAs, CLIF-C OFs, and CLIF-C ACLFs were significantly higher than those of the Child–Pugh, model for end-stage liver disease, and model for end-stage liver disease-Na scores in ACLF patients according to the CLIF-C definition (all P < 0.05), but there were no significant differences in patients without ACLF or in patients with ACLF according to the AARC definition. The CLIF-SOFAs, CLIF-C OFs, and CLIF-C ACLFs had higher specificities with a fixed sensitivity than liver specific scores in ACLF patients according to the CLIF-C definition, but not in ACLF patients according to the AARC definition. Conclusions: The CLIF-SOFAs, CLIF-C OFs, and CLIF-C ACLFs are useful scoring systems that provide accurate information on prognosis in patients with ACLF according to the CLIF-C definition, but not the AARC definition. © 2017 Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology Foundation and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd
DOI
10.1111/jgh.13991
Appears in Collections:
의과대학 > 의학과 > Journal papers
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
Export
RIS (EndNote)
XLS (Excel)
XML


qrcode

BROWSE