Outcome Prediction of Covert Hepatic Encephalopathy in Liver Cirrhosis: Comparison of Four Testing Strategies.
Aged
End Stage Liver Disease
/ diagnosis
Feasibility Studies
Female
Follow-Up Studies
Hepatic Encephalopathy
/ diagnosis
Humans
Kaplan-Meier Estimate
Liver Cirrhosis
/ complications
Male
Middle Aged
Predictive Value of Tests
Prognosis
Prospective Studies
Psychometrics
/ methods
ROC Curve
Risk Assessment
/ methods
Severity of Illness Index
Journal
Clinical and translational gastroenterology
ISSN: 2155-384X
Titre abrégé: Clin Transl Gastroenterol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101532142
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
06 2020
06 2020
Historique:
entrez:
23
6
2020
pubmed:
23
6
2020
medline:
11
5
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Despite the negative impact of covert hepatic encephalopathy on the outcome of patients with liver cirrhosis, data regarding the ability of different testing strategies to predict overt hepatic encephalopathy (OHE) development and mortality are limited. This study aimed to compare the ability of Psychometric Hepatic Encephalopathy Score (PHES), critical flicker frequency (CFF), simplified animal naming test (S-ANT1), and clinical covert hepatic encephalopathy (CCHE) score to predict OHE development and mortality. A total of 224 patients with liver cirrhosis were tested with different testing strategies and prospectively followed up regarding clinically relevant outcomes (OHE or death/liver transplantation). Prevalence of pathological results varied among the testing strategies: PHES 33.9%, CFF 17.9%, S-ANT1 41.5%, and CCHE score 33.9%. All testing strategies were independent predictors of OHE development after adjusting for model of end-stage liver disease (MELD) score and history of OHE. The predictive performances of PHES (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.742) and CCHE (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.785) regarding OHE development during the next 180 days were significantly better than those of CFF and S-ANT1. In multivariable analysis, pathological results in PHES, S-ANT1, and CCHE score were independently associated with higher mortality. CFF did not correlate with mortality in the whole cohort. In the subgroup of patients with a MELD score <15, pathological results in PHES, CFF, or CCHE score were independent predictors of higher mortality. PHES and CCHE score predict OHE development and mortality in patients with liver cirrhosis. In particular, in patients with low MELD score, both testing strategies could help to identify patients who might benefit from liver transplantation.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32568474
doi: 10.14309/ctg.0000000000000172
pii: 01720094-202006000-00004
pmc: PMC7339190
doi:
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e00172Références
Dig Liver Dis. 2018 May;50(5):496-500
pubmed: 29530628
Eur J Intern Med. 2019 Feb;60:96-100
pubmed: 30131209
Hepatology. 2019 Nov;70(5):1704-1713
pubmed: 31038758
Hepatology. 2007 Mar;45(3):833-4
pubmed: 17326210
Am J Gastroenterol. 2019 May;114(5):764-770
pubmed: 30848730
PLoS One. 2016 Jan 08;11(1):e0146076
pubmed: 26745876
Hepatology. 2010 May;51(5):1675-82
pubmed: 20186844
Hepatology. 2014 Aug;60(2):715-35
pubmed: 25042402
Metab Brain Dis. 2016 Apr;31(2):267-72
pubmed: 26435407
Hepatology. 2002 Feb;35(2):357-66
pubmed: 11826409
J Hepatol. 2001 May;34(5):768-73
pubmed: 11434627
Hepatology. 2017 Jul;66(1):198-208
pubmed: 28271528
Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2019 Jun;49(12):1518-1527
pubmed: 31032966
Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2018 Aug;48(3):313-321
pubmed: 29863286
BMC Med. 2014 Sep 18;12:145
pubmed: 25242656
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2017 Jun;15(6):934-936
pubmed: 27816756
Am J Gastroenterol. 2014 Nov;109(11):1757-63
pubmed: 25178701
Radiology. 1983 Sep;148(3):839-43
pubmed: 6878708
Gastroenterology. 2010 Jun;138(7):2332-40
pubmed: 20178797
J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2018 Mar;33(3):718-725
pubmed: 28768371
Z Gastroenterol. 1998 Oct;36(10):909-16
pubmed: 9846370
Gastroenterology. 2015 Nov;149(6):1483-9
pubmed: 26299413
Metab Brain Dis. 2019 Feb;34(1):289-295
pubmed: 30506333