4.5 Article

Assessment of Alcohol Consumption in Liver Transplant Candidates and Recipients: The Best Combination of the Tools Available

Journal

LIVER TRANSPLANTATION
Volume 20, Issue 7, Pages 815-822

Publisher

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1002/lt.23881

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The detection of alcohol consumption in liver transplant candidates (LTCs) and liver transplant recipients (LTRs) is required to enable a proper assessment of transplant eligibility and early management of alcohol relapse, respectively. In this clinical setting, urinary ethyl glucuronide (uEtG), the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test for Alcohol Consumption (AUDIT-c), serum ethanol, urinary ethanol, carbohydrate-deficient transferrin (CDT), and other indirect markers of alcohol consumption were evaluated and compared prospectively in 121 LTCs and LTRs. Alcohol consumption was diagnosed when AUDIT-c results were positive or it was confirmed by a patient's history in response to abnormal results. Alcohol consumption was found in 30.6% of the patients. uEtG was found to be the strongest marker of alcohol consumption (odds ratio=414.5, P<0.001) and provided a more accurate prediction rate of alcohol consumption [area under receiving operating characteristic (ROC) curve = 0.94] than CDT (area under ROC curve = 0.63, P<0.001) and AUDIT-c (area under ROC curve = 0.73, P<0.001). The combination of uEtG and AUDIT-c showed higher accuracy in detecting alcohol consumption in comparison with the combination of CDT and AUDIT-c (area under ROC curve = 0.98 versus 0.80, P<0.001). Furthermore, uEtG was the most useful marker for detecting alcohol consumption in patients with negative AUDIT-c results. In conclusion, the combination of AUDIT-c and uEtG improves the detection of alcohol consumption in LTCs and LTRs. Therefore, they should be used routinely for these patients. (C) 2014 AASLD.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available