4.6 Article

Risk Factor Analysis in Patients With Liver Cirrhosis Undergoing Cardiovascular Operations

Journal

ANNALS OF THORACIC SURGERY
Volume 89, Issue 3, Pages 811-818

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2009.12.021

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background. Variable outcomes of cardiac operations have been reported in cirrhotic patients, but no definitive predictive prognostic factors have been established. This retrospective study assessed operative results to identify risk factors associated with morbidity after cardiovascular operations in cirrhotic patients. Methods. The study comprised 42 cirrhotic patients who underwent cardiovascular operations from January 1991 to January 2009. Thirty patients were Child-Turcotte-Pugh class A, and 12 were class B. Hospital morbidity occurred in 13 patients (31.0%; M group), including 4 who died in-hospital. Patients without severe complications (N group) were compared with the M group patients. The Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score was evaluated in 25 patients. Results. Significant differences in hospital morbidity between the M vs N groups were identified for platelet count (8.7 +/- 3.8 vs 12.1 +/- 4.2 x 10(4)/mu L), MELD score (17.8 +/- 5.3 vs 9.8 +/- 4.9), operation time (370 +/- 88 vs 313 +/- 94 minutes), and cardiopulmonary bypass time (174 +/- 46 vs 149 +/- 53 minutes) in univariate analyses (p < 0.005). Platelet count, operation time, and age were significantly associated with hospital morbidity in multivariate analyses (p < 0.005). Platelet count of 9.6 +/- 10(4)/mu L and MELD score of 13 were cutoff values for hospital morbidity. Conclusions. Careful consideration of operative indications and methods are necessary in cirrhotic patients with low platelet counts or high MELD scores. A high incidence of hospital morbidity is predicted in patients with platelet counts of less than 9.6 x 10(4)/mu L or MELD scores exceeding 13.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available