We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Simple organ failure count versus CANONIC grading system for predicting mortality in acute-on-chronic liver failure.
Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology 2015 March
BACKGROUND AND AIM: This study assessed the utility of a simple organ failure count (SOFC) in predicting the in-hospital mortality in patients with acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) compared with Chronic Liver Failure Acute-on-Chronic Liver Failure in Cirrhosis (CANONIC) ACLF grading system.
METHODS: Consecutive patients of ACLF were included prospectively from 2012 to 2013. The diagnosis was based on Asian-Pacific Association for the Study of the Liver (APASL) criteria except for the inclusion of non-hepatic insults as acute events. Organ failures were defined as per the Chronic Liver Failure-Sequential Organ Failure Assessment system. SOFC was calculated as the simple number of organ failures from 0 to 6. In-hospital mortality was recorded.
RESULTS: Majority (92[87%]) of the 106 patients included were males, had alcohol (76[72%]) as the etiology of cirrhosis, and alcoholic hepatitis (58[55%]) as the acute precipitating event. Overall, 51(48%) patients died in-hospital. In-hospital mortality in patients with SOFC of 0 (n = 9), 1 (n = 39), 2 (n = 24), 3 (n = 24), 4 (n = 7), and 5 (n = 3) was 0%, 26%, 58%, 71%, 100%, and 100% respectively (P < 0.001), whereas it was 10%, 30%, 58%, and 79% in patients with no-ACLF (n = 21), grades 1 (n = 27), 2 (n = 24), and 3 ACLF (n = 34) respectively (P < 0.001). Patients with no-ACLF (n = 21) had higher mortality than SOFC 0 as they included 9 patients with SOFC 0 (0% mortality) and 12 patients with SOFC 1 (17% mortality). Mortality was similar between 12 no-ACLF and 27 grade 1 ACLF patients (P = 0.462) that comprised SOFC 1.
CONCLUSION: SOFC is a simpler and better method than the CANONIC grading system for predicting the in-hospital mortality in patients with ACLF defined as per APASL criteria.
METHODS: Consecutive patients of ACLF were included prospectively from 2012 to 2013. The diagnosis was based on Asian-Pacific Association for the Study of the Liver (APASL) criteria except for the inclusion of non-hepatic insults as acute events. Organ failures were defined as per the Chronic Liver Failure-Sequential Organ Failure Assessment system. SOFC was calculated as the simple number of organ failures from 0 to 6. In-hospital mortality was recorded.
RESULTS: Majority (92[87%]) of the 106 patients included were males, had alcohol (76[72%]) as the etiology of cirrhosis, and alcoholic hepatitis (58[55%]) as the acute precipitating event. Overall, 51(48%) patients died in-hospital. In-hospital mortality in patients with SOFC of 0 (n = 9), 1 (n = 39), 2 (n = 24), 3 (n = 24), 4 (n = 7), and 5 (n = 3) was 0%, 26%, 58%, 71%, 100%, and 100% respectively (P < 0.001), whereas it was 10%, 30%, 58%, and 79% in patients with no-ACLF (n = 21), grades 1 (n = 27), 2 (n = 24), and 3 ACLF (n = 34) respectively (P < 0.001). Patients with no-ACLF (n = 21) had higher mortality than SOFC 0 as they included 9 patients with SOFC 0 (0% mortality) and 12 patients with SOFC 1 (17% mortality). Mortality was similar between 12 no-ACLF and 27 grade 1 ACLF patients (P = 0.462) that comprised SOFC 1.
CONCLUSION: SOFC is a simpler and better method than the CANONIC grading system for predicting the in-hospital mortality in patients with ACLF defined as per APASL criteria.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app