4.3 Article Proceedings Paper

Prognostic value of quantitative liver function tests in viral cirrhosis: a prospective study

Journal

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Volume 18, Issue 7, Pages 713-720

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/01.meg.0000219104.40435.43

Keywords

galactose elimination capacity; monoethylglycinexylidide; Child-Turcotte-Pugh; Model for End Stage Liver Disease; prognosis; liver cirrhosis; liver transplantation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background and aims Widespread application of quantitative liver function tests as a prognostic tool is controversial. In this study we assessed the predictivity of serial evaluations of galactose elimination capacity (GEC) and the monoethylglycinexylidide (MEGX) test on survival in viral cirrhosis, and secondarily we compared these tests with Child-Turcotte-Pugh (CTP) and Model for End Stage Liver Disease (MELD) scores. Methods In a cohort of 35 patients with viral cirrhosis, GEC and MEGX were evaluated every 6 months for 24 months and compared with CTP and MELD scores at the same time intervals. The end points were patient death or liver transplantation. Results Statistically significant differences between dead/transplanted patients and survivors were found for basal values of GEC, MEGX, CTP and MELD. Receiver-operating characteristics curves of CTP and MELD scores showed a higher prognostic accuracy than GEC and MEGX. On multivariate analysis, neither GEC nor MEGX were independent predictors of survival. Repeated-measures analysis of GEC and MEGX did not increase the prognostic accuracy of these tests and did not add useful prognostic information on patient outcome during the following. Conclusions Our data suggest that neither single nor repeated determinations of GEC and MEGX are superior to CTP and MELD scores in predicting prognosis of patients with viral cirrhosis.

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