4.2 Article

Cross-sectional and dynamic change of serum metabolite profiling for Hepatitis B-related acute-on-chronic liver failure by UPLC/MS

期刊

JOURNAL OF VIRAL HEPATITIS
卷 21, 期 1, 页码 53-63

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/jvh.12122

关键词

biomarkers; hepatitis B; liver failure; metabolomics; prognosis; serum

资金

  1. National 12th 5-year Plan for Hepatitis Research [2012ZX10002004-011]
  2. Tianjin Science and Technology Fund, China [12JCYBJC17300]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The Summary Acute-on-chronic liver failure(ACLF) is an increasingly recognized entity encompassing an acute deterioration of liver function and results in the failure of one or more organs with high short-term mortality. The focus of this study was to discover noninvasive and reliable biomarkers for the diagnosis and prognosis of hepatitis B-related ACLF. Ultra-performance liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (UPLC/MS) was used to analyse serum metabolites of 28 patients with hepatitis B-related ACLF, 35 patients with Child-Pugh A cirrhosis, 30 patients with chronic hepatitis B and 35 healthy volunteers (HS). Characteristic metabolites were screened, identified and dynamically tracked to investigate their value for diagnosis and prognosis. After comparing serum metabolic profile of hepatitis B-related ACLF and Child-Pugh A cirrhosis, 99 characteristic metabolites were selected, and 38 of them were identified. Dynamic tracking model demonstrated that 17 metabolites were related to prognosis of hepatitis B-related ACLF, and there were also 11 metabolites which improved with treatment in the survival group. The correlations between these characteristic metabolites and the model for end-stage liver disease score were strong. These observations contributed to the investigation of the mechanisms of hepatitis B-related ACLF manifestation and progression on the metabolic level, and they provided information for the identification of biomarkers for the diagnosis and prognosis of hepatitis B-related ACLF.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据