4.3 Article

A novel dynamic model for predicting outcome in patients with hepatitis B virus related acute-on-chronic liver failure

Journal

ONCOTARGET
Volume 8, Issue 65, Pages 108970-108980

Publisher

IMPACT JOURNALS LLC
DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.22447

Keywords

acute-on-chronic liver failure; hepatitis B; prognostic model

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81470877]
  2. Foundation of Capital Science Committee of China [H020920020890]
  3. Capital Health Research and Development of Special [2011-2018-09]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Aim: It is challenging to predict the outcome of patients with hepatitis B virus related acute-on-chronic liver failure (HBV-ACLF) through existing prognostic models. Our aim was to establish a novel dynamic model to improve the predictive efficiency of 30-day mortality in HBV-ACLF patients. Methods: 305 patients who were diagnosed as HBV-ACLF (derivation cohort, n= 211; validation cohort, n= 94) were included in this study. The HBV-ACLF dynamic (HBV-ACLFD) model was constructed based on the daily levels of predictive variables in 7 days after diagnosis combined with baseline risk factors by multivariate logistic regression analysis. The HBV-ACLFD model was compared with the Child-Turcotte-Pugh (CTP) score, end-stage liver disease (MELD) score, and MELD within corporation of serum sodium (MELD-Na) score by the area under the receiver-operating characteristic curves (AUROC). Results: The HBV-ACLFD model demonstrated excellent discrimination with AUROC of 0.848 in the derivation cohort and of 0.813 in the validation cohort (p= 0.620). The performance of the HBV-ACLFD model appeared to be superior to MELD score, MELD-Na score and CTP score (P< 0.0001). Conclusion: The HBV-ACLFD model can accurately predict 30-day mortality in patients with HBV-ACLF, which is helpful to select appropriate clinical procedures, so as to relieve the social and economic burden.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available