酒精相关慢加急性肝衰竭合并感染患者的短期预后分析

彭宇辉 ,  陈婧 ,  刘晓燕 ,  李晨 ,  孙漫漫 ,  宁鹏 ,  李会 ,  严立龙 ,  关崇丹 ,  苏海滨

临床肝胆病杂志 ›› 2025, Vol. 41 ›› Issue (07) : 1388 -1393.

PDF (918KB)
临床肝胆病杂志 ›› 2025, Vol. 41 ›› Issue (07) : 1388 -1393. DOI: 10.12449/JCH250724
其他肝病

酒精相关慢加急性肝衰竭合并感染患者的短期预后分析

作者信息 +

Short-term prognosis of patients with alcohol-related liver diseases-acute-on-chronic liver failure comorbid with infection

Author information +
文章历史 +
PDF (939K)

摘要

目的 探讨酒精相关慢加急性肝衰竭(ALD-ACLF)合并感染患者短期预后影响因素,开发新的预后模型。 方法 选取2019年1月—2021年12月中国人民解放军总医院第五医学中心收治的89例ALD-ACLF合并感染患者为本次研究对象。以患者入组时为基线,收集其临床资料。根据患者28天生存情况分为生存组(n=53)和死亡组(n=36),对比两组患者基线临床资料。计量资料符合正态分布2组间比较采用t检验;不符合正态分布2组间比较采用Wilcoxon秩和检验。计数资料2组间比较采用卡方检验。多因素分析采用非条件Logistic回归分析;采用Z检验对受试者操作特征曲线(ROC曲线)下面积进行比较,评估模型诊断价值。 结果 死亡组患者与生存组相比,Hb(t=-2.397,P=0.019)、ALT(Z=-3.437, P=0.001)、GGT(Z=-2.617, P=0.009)、Cr(Z=-3.938, P<0.001)、BUN(Z=-3.423, P=0.001)、NH3Z=-4.406, P<0.001)、INR(Z=-3.428, P=0.001)、CRP(Z=-2.128, P=0.033)、PCT(Z=-2.441, P=0.015)、MELD评分(t=-4.817, P<0.001)、AKI发生率(χ2=21.602, P<0.001)、肺部感染发生率(χ2=4.866, P=0.027)、休克发生率(χ2=16.285, P<0.001)更高,Alb水平(Z=-2.473, P=0.013)、腹腔感染发生率(χ2=5.897, P=0.015)更低,差异均有统计学意义。多因素分析显示,NH3OR=1.027,95%CI:1.006~1.049, P=0.012)、MELD评分(OR=1.103,95%CI:1.011~1.203,P=0.027)、休克发生率(OR=6.326,95%CI:1.533~26.101,P=0.011)是ALD-ACLF合并感染患者28天死亡的独立危险因素。据此构建新的预测模型Y=0.027×NH3+0.098×MELD评分+1.845×休克-4.111。ROC曲线显示,新模型(曲线下面积为0.861,灵敏度为77.78%,特异度为88.68%)诊断价值高于MELD评分(曲线下面积为0.776,灵敏度为77.78%,特异度为67.92%),差异有统计学意义(Z=2.136,P=0.032 6)。 结论 ALD-ACLF合并感染患者短期预后不佳,MELD评分、NH3和发生休克是此类患者短期预后的影响因素,三者联合对短期预后的预测价值较高。

Abstract

Objective To investigate the influencing factors for the short-term prognosis of patients with alcohol-related liver diseases-acute-on-chronic liver failure (ALD-ACLF) comorbid with infection. Methods A total of 89 ALD-ACLF patients with infection who were admitted to theFifth Medical Center of PLA General Hospital from January 2019 to December 2021 were enrolled as subjects, and related clinical data were collected at baseline (time of patient enrollment). According to the 28-day survival status of patients, they were divided into survival group with 53 patients and death group with 36 patients, and baseline clinical data were compared between the two groups. The t-test was used for comparison of normally distributed continuous data between groups, and the Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used for comparison of non-normally distributed continuous data between groups; the chi-square test was used for comparison of categorical data between groups. A non-conditional Logistic regression analysis was used to perform the multivariate analysis. The Z-test was used for comparison of the area under the ROC curve (AUC), and the diagnostic value of the model was assessed. Results Compared with the survival group, the death group had significantly higher hemoglobin (t=-2.397, P=0.019), alanine aminotransferase (Z=-3.437, P=0.001), gamma-glutamyl transpeptidase (Z=-2.617, P=0.009), creatinine (Z=-3.938, P<0.001), blood urea nitrogen (Z=-3.423, P=0.001), NH3Z=-4.406, P<0.001), international normalized ratio (Z=-3.428, P=0.001), C-reactive protein (Z=-2.128, P=0.033), procalcitonin (Z=-2.441, P=0.015), Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score (t=-4.817, P<0.001), incidence rate of acute kidney injury (χ2=21.602, P<0.001), incidence rate of pulmonary infection (χ2=4.866, P=0.027), and incidence rate of shock (χ2=16.285, P<0.001), as well as significantly lower albumin (Z=-2.473, P=0.013) and incidence rate of abdominal infection (χ2=5.897, P=0.015). The multivariate analysis showed that NH3 (odds ratio [OR]=1.027, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.006‍ ‍—‍ ‍1.049, P=0.012), MELD score (OR=1.103, 95%CI: 1.011‍ ‍—‍ ‍1.203, P=0.027], and the incidence rate of shock (OR=6.326, 95%CI: 1.533‍ ‍—‍ ‍26.101, P=0.011) were independent risk factors for 28-day mortality in ALD-ACLF patients comorbid with infection. Based on these factors, a predictive model was established as Y=0.027×NH3+0.098×MELD score+1.845×shock-4.111. The ROC curve analysis showed that the new model had an AUC of 0.861, a sensitivity of 77.78%, and a specificity of 88.68%, while MELD score had an AUC of 0.776, a sensitivity of 77.78%, and a specificity of 67.92%, suggesting that the new model had a significantly higher diagnostic value than MELD score (Z=2.136, P=0.032 6). Conclusion ALD-ACLF patients with infection tend to have a poor short-term prognosis, and MELD score, NH3, and shock are influencing factors for the short-term prognosis of such patients. The combination of these three factors has a high value in predicting short-term prognosis.

Graphical abstract

关键词

慢加急性肝功能衰竭 / 感染 / 饮酒 / 预后

Key words

Acute-On-Chronic Liver Failure / Infections / Alcohol Drinking / Prognosis

引用本文

引用格式 ▾
彭宇辉,陈婧,刘晓燕,李晨,孙漫漫,宁鹏,李会,严立龙,关崇丹,苏海滨. 酒精相关慢加急性肝衰竭合并感染患者的短期预后分析[J]. 临床肝胆病杂志, 2025, 41(07): 1388-1393 DOI:10.12449/JCH250724

登录浏览全文

4963

注册一个新账户 忘记密码

慢加急性肝衰竭(acute-on-chronic liver failure,ACLF)是临床常见的严重肝病综合征,特点为病情进展快、并发症多、病死率高1。随着生活水平的提高,饮酒人群逐渐增多,酒精相关慢加急性肝衰竭(alcohol-related liver diseases,acute-on-chronic liver failure,ALD-ACLF)已成为困扰医务人员的难题。感染是ALD-ACLF的严重并发症之一,一旦发生,常导致病情恶化,严重影响患者预后。目前临床上用于判断ALD-ACLF患者的预后模型主要包括终末期肝病模型(model for end-stage liver disease,MELD)、Maddrey判别函数、格拉斯哥酒精性肝炎评分、Lille模型等,但未对ALD-ACLF合并感染的患者进行单独分析,可能低估了疾病的严重程度2。本研究旨在探讨ALD-ACLF合并感染患者短期预后影响因素,发掘新的预后模型,为临床早期判断ALD-ACLF合并感染患者预后提供帮助。

1 资料与方法

1.1 研究对象

回顾性分析本中心2019年1月—2021年12月收治的ALD-ACLF合并感染患者。纳入标准:(1)符合ALD-ACLF诊断标准;(2)合并感染;(3)病例资料完整。排除标准:(1)年龄<18岁或>80岁患者;(2)其他原因导致的ACLF,包括病毒、自身免疫性、先天代谢性以及药物性等;(3)肝脏或其他器官的恶性肿瘤;(4)肝移植患者;(5)合并HIV感染或正在服用免疫抑制剂;(6)孕妇;(7)病例资料不完整。酒精性肝病诊断标准参考《酒精性肝病防治指南(2018年更新版)》3。ACLF诊断标准参考《亚太肝病学会慢加急性(亚急性)肝衰竭专家共识2019更新解读》4。自发性细菌性腹膜炎(spontaneous bacterial peritonitis,SBP)诊断标准参照《肝硬化腹水诊疗指南(2023年版)》5。肝性脑病(hepatic encephalopathy,HE)诊断标准参考《肝硬化肝性脑病诊疗指南(2024年版)》6,消化道出血诊断标准参考《肝硬化门静脉高压症食管、胃底静脉曲张破裂出血诊治专家共识(2019版)》7,急性肾损伤(acute kidney injury,AKI)诊断标准参考《中国急性肾损伤临床实践指南》8,休克诊断参考《2020国际脓毒症和感染性休克管理指南与日本脓毒症诊疗指南之异同》9,肺部感染、血液感染、泌尿系感染诊断参考《终末期肝病合并感染诊治专家共识》10

1.2 研究方法

根据纳入及排除标准连续纳入患者,所有患者随访28 d,随访终点为死亡或肝移植。以患者入组时为基线,收集患者临床资料,包括基本信息、生命体征、实验室指标、并发症、基础疾病以及MELD评分等。根据患者28 d生存情况分为生存组和死亡组,对两组患者基线情况进行比较分析,所有实验室检查均在本中心检验科完成。

1.3 统计学方法

采用SPSS 23.0软件用于数据整理和统计分析,计量资料符合正态分布采用x¯±s进行描述,2组间比较采用t检验;不符合正态分布采用MP25P75)表示,2组间比较采用Wilcoxon秩和检验。计数资料2组间比较采用χ2检验。多因素分析采用非条件Logistic回归分析;采用Z检验对两个模型受试者操作特征曲线(ROC曲线)下面积(AUC)进行比较,评估模型诊断价值。P<0.05为差异有统计学意义。

2 结果

2.1 一般情况

共纳入ACLF患者609例,其中ALD-ACLF合并感染患者89例,男性占97.75%(87例)。患者平均年龄(50.57±8.04)岁,存在糖尿病或高血压各4例(4.49%)。感染部位以腹腔最为常见,SBP 60例(67.42%),肺部感染37例(41.57%),血液感染16例(17.98%),泌尿系感染2例(2.25%)。住院期间发生感染性休克24例(26.97%)、消化道出血16例(17.98%)、HE 38例(42.70%)、AKI 53例(59.55%)。28天病死率40.45%(36例)。

2.2 感染菌株的临床特点

60例临床诊断SBP患者中,腹水细菌培养阳性9例(15%),其中大肠埃希菌5例,科氏葡萄球菌、鹑鸡肠球菌、肺炎克雷伯菌、嗜水气单胞菌各1例。37例肺部感染患者中,2例痰培养为肺炎克雷伯菌,2例黄曲霉菌。16例血液感染患者中,2例大肠埃希菌,2例肺炎克雷伯菌,屎肠球菌、金黄色葡萄球菌、人葡萄球菌、肠炎沙门菌、犬巴斯德菌、嗜水气单胞菌各1例。

2.3 ALD-ACLF合并感染患者28天死亡危险因素的单因素分析

实验室结果中,死亡组患者血红蛋白(Hb)、ALT、GGT、肌酐(Cr)、尿素氮(BUN)、血氨(NH3)、国际标准化比值(INR)、C-反应蛋白(CRP)、降钙素原(PCT)、MELD评分均高于生存组,Alb低于生存组,差异均有统计学意义(P值均<0.05)。并发症方面,死亡组患者AKI的发生率为88.89%,显著高于生存组(39.62%)(P<0.05)。感染部位,死亡组患者以肺部感染多见,发生率为55.56%,生存组患者以SBP多见,发生率为77.36%,在感染发生后,死亡组出现休克的比例显著高于生存组,两组间差异均有统计学意义(P值均<0.05)(表1)。

2.4 ALD-ACLF合并感染患者28天死亡危险因素分析

将单因素分析中有统计学意义的变量进行多因素Logistic分析,因MELD评分已包含AKI、Cr、INR,与MELD评分存在共线性关系,故仅纳入MELD评分进行分析。结果显示,NH3OR(95%CI):1.027(1.006~1.049),P=0.012]、MELD评分[OR(95%CI):1.103(1.011~1.203),P=0.027]、发生休克[OR(95%CI):6.326(1.533~26.101),P=0.011]是28天死亡的独立危险因素(表2),据此构建预测新模型Y=0.027×NH3+0.098×MELD评分+1.845×休克-4.111。

2.5 新模型与MELD评分预测价值的比较

ROC曲线显示,新模型的AUC为0.861,灵敏度为77.78%,特异度为88.68%;MELD评分AUC为0.776,灵敏度为77.78%,特异度为67.92%;新模型诊断价值明显高于MELD评分(Z=2.136,P=0.032 6)(图1)。

3 讨论

肝脏是分解与代谢酒精的主要场所,长期大量饮酒会导致酒精蓄积于肝脏,对肝细胞造成损伤,引起肝细胞坏死,导致肝损害11。当病情持续进展,患者肝脏对酒精的分解及代谢能力进一步减弱,会出现极度乏力、腹胀、厌食、呕吐等严重消化道症状,肝功能指标异常、凝血障碍,进展为ACLF,严重者可伴有感染、消化道出血和HE等并发症12。临床研究显示,ACLF的病死率达30%~50%13。本研究89例ALD-ACLF合并感染患者,28天病死率40.45%,与既往文献报道一致。

ALD-ACLF患者由于肠道菌群紊乱、肠道黏膜屏障功能减弱、细菌易位、机体抵抗力低下等原因,极易出现感染。据报道,ACLF患者30天内发生细菌感染的概率高达38%~45%14。细菌感染不仅是ACLF的常见诱发因素,也是ACLF患者最常见的死亡原因15。发生感染后,致病菌产生的内毒素、外毒素及其介导的多种炎症介质可导致机体损害,引起全身炎症反应综合征、脓毒症,甚至休克,诱发其他脏器功能障碍,进一步增加患者病死率16-18。本组资料在感染发生后,38例(42.70%)出现HE,53例(59.55%)出现AKI。提示对于ACLF合并感染患者,在抗感染的同时,应积极防止其他脏器功能的损伤。目前已证实对于合并SBP的患者,在抗感染的基础上给予Alb扩容,可明显降低AKI的发生,并降低病死率。有研究表明,ACLF患者细菌感染发生率为38%~75%,其中社区获得性感染占53%。常见的感染部位依次为腹腔(28%~43%)、肺部(26%)、尿路(26%~28%)。在本次89例ALD-ACLF合并感染患者中,常见的感染为SBP 60例、肺部感染37例、血液感染16例及泌尿系感染2例,腹水细菌培养阳性者主要是大肠埃希菌、葡萄球菌属、肺炎克雷伯菌,与国内外研究基本一致。

多因素分析显示,NH3、MELD评分及发生休克是ALD-ACLF合并感染患者28天死亡的独立危险因素。目前为止,MELD评分仍是国际上较为常用的评价ACLF患者预后的评分系统,能客观、有效地评估ACLF患者的短期预后19。NH3是HE发病机制的核心,高氨血症往往是发生HE的前奏,提示预后差。国外学者20对101例ACLF患者研究发现,高氨血症与HE的存在与ACLF严重程度有关。Hu等21通过研究174例HBV-ACLF患者NH3水平与短期预后之间的关系发现,死亡组中HBV-ACLF合并高氨血症患者28天病死率显著增高,NH3是HBV-ACLF患者的独立危险因素。本研究中死亡组患者的NH3水平明显高于存活组,提示对于ALD-ACLF患者,发生感染后如出现NH3增高,应积极查找诱因,警惕HE发生。感染性休克是重症感染的表现,是宿主对感染的反应失调,出现各器官灌注减少,机体全身炎症反应明显,从而导致危及生命的器官功能损害。因此,对于此类患者,应及时识别,在给予广谱抗感染治疗的基础之上,早期积极扩容,确保灌注压,以维持机体各重要脏器的有效灌注。ALD-ACLF患者通常存在外周血管扩张,心脏功能受损,血流动力学表现为高排低阻,基础血压低,在此基础之上感染更易导致休克,危害大,早期识别、早期救治尤为重要。本研究89例感染患者中,24例伴发感染性休克,占比高达26.97%。在将NH3、休克和MELD评分三者结合构建新的预测模型后,其预测ALD-ACLF合并感染患者28天死亡的价值优于MELD评分,其AUC显著高于MELD评分(0.861 vs 0.776)。

总之,ALD-ACLF患者合并感染后死亡风险高,由NH3、休克和MELD评分三者构建的新模型对于短期预后有较好的预测作用。但由于样本量有限,且为回顾性分析,仅使用单中心数据建立了预测模型,因此,模型的外推性还需要进一步验证。

参考文献

[1]

XU MM, KONG M, YU PF, et al. Clinical course and outcome patterns of acute-on-chronic liver failure: A multicenter retrospective cohort study[J]. J Clin Transl Hepatol, 2021, 9(5): 626-634. DOI: 10.14218/JCTH.2020.00179 .

[2]

SUNDARAM V, SHAH P, MAHMUD N, et al. Patients with severe acute-on-chronic liver failure are disadvantaged by model for end-stage liver disease-based organ allocation policy[J]. Aliment Pharmacol Ther, 2020, 52(7): 1204-1213. DOI: 10.1111/apt.15988 .

[3]

National Workshop on Fatty Liver and Alcoholic Liver Disease, Chinese Society of Hepatology, Chinese Medical Association; Fatty Liver Expert Committee, Chinese Medical Doctor Association. Guidelines of prevention and treatment for alcoholic liver disease: a 2018 update[J]. J Clin Hepatol, 2018, 34(5): 939-946. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-5256.2018.05.006 .

[4]

中华医学会肝病学分会脂肪肝和酒精性肝病学组, 中国医师协会脂肪性肝病专家委员会. 酒精性肝病防治指南(2018年更新版)[J]. 临床肝胆病杂志, 2018, 34(5): 939-946. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-5256.2018.05.006 .

[5]

CHEN T, NING Q. Acute-on-chronic liver failure: consensus recommendations of the Asian Pacific Association for the Study of the Liver (APASL): an update[J]. Chin J Infect Dis, 2019, 37(9): 561-564. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1000-6680.2019.09.011 .

[6]

陈韬, 宁琴. 亚太肝病学会慢加急性(亚急性)肝衰竭专家共识2019更新解读[J]. 中华传染病杂志, 2019, 37(9): 561-564. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1000-6680.2019.09.011 .

[7]

Chinese Society of Hepatology, Chinese Medical Association. Guidelines on the management of ascites in cirrhosis (2023 version)[J]. Chin J Hepatol, 2023, 31(8): 813-826. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn501113-20230719-00011 .

[8]

中华医学会肝病学分会. 肝硬化腹水诊疗指南(2023年版)[J]. 中华肝脏病杂志, 2023, 31(8): 813-826. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn501113-20230719-00011 .

[9]

Chinese Society of Hepatology, Chinese Medical Association. Chinese guidelines on the management of hepatic encephalopathy in cirrhosis (2024)[J]. Chin J Hepatol, 2024, 32(9): 799-812. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn501113-20240630-00309 .

[10]

中华医学会肝病学分会. 肝硬化肝性脑病诊疗指南(2024年版)[J]. 中华肝脏病杂志, 2024, 32(9): 799-812. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn501113-20240630-00309 .

[11]

Chinese Society of Spleen and Portal Hypertension Surgery, Chinese Society of Surgery, Chinese Medical Association. Expert consensus on diagnosis and treatment of esophagogastric variceal bleeding in cirrhotic portal hypertension (2019 edition)[J]. Chin J Surg, 2019, 57(12): 885-892. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.0529-5815.2019.12.002 .

[12]

中华医学会外科学分会脾及门静脉高压外科学组. 肝硬化门静脉高压症食管、胃底静脉曲张破裂出血诊治专家共识(2019版)[J]. 中华外科杂志, 2019, 57(12): 885-892. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.0529-5815.2019.12.002 .

[13]

National Clinical Research Center for Kidney Diseases, Chinese Nephrologist Association, Expert Group on AKI Guidelines. Chinese clinical practice guideline for acute kidney injury[J]. Natl Med J China, 2023, 103(42): 3332-3366. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn112137-20230802-00133 .

[14]

国家慢性肾病临床医学研究中心, 中国医师协会肾脏内科医师分会, 中国急性肾损伤临床实践指南专家组. 中国急性肾损伤临床实践指南[J]. 中华医学杂志, 2023, 103(42): 3332-3366. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn112137-20230802-00133 .

[15]

AN X, MA XC. Comparison between the 2020 international guidelines for the management of sepsis and septic shock and the Japanese guidelines for the management of sepsis[J]. Chin Critical Care Med, 2023, 35(5): 453-457. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn121430-20221227-01119 .

[16]

安欣, 马晓春. 2020国际脓毒症和感染性休克管理指南与日本脓毒症诊疗指南之异同[J]. 中华危重病急救医学, 2023, 35(5): 453-457. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn121430-20221227-01119 .

[17]

Society of Infectious Diseases, Chinese Medical Association. Expert consensus on diagnosis and treatment of end-stage liver disease complicated with infections[J]. J Clin Hepatol, 2018, 34(9): 1862-1872. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-5256.2018.09.008 .

[18]

中华医学会感染病学分会. 终末期肝病合并感染诊治专家共识[J]. 临床肝胆病杂志, 2018, 34(9): 1862-1872. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-5256.2018.09.008 .

[19]

GUAN X, XING F, LI Y. Alcohol consumption increases the incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with hepatitis B cirrhosis but not in patients with hepatitis C cirrhosis[J]. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol, 2021, 33(9): 1218-1221. DOI: 10.1097/MEG.0000000000001837 .

[20]

SUN FR, WANG BY. Severe alcoholic hepatitis and acute-on-chronic liver failure[J]. J Clin Hepatol, 2019, 35(3): 489-493. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-5256.2019.03.008 .

[21]

孙福荣, 王炳元. 重症酒精性肝炎与慢加急性肝衰竭[J]. 临床肝胆病杂志, 2019, 35(3): 489-493. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-5256.2019.03.008 .

[22]

MEDHAT MA, GUSHKEN F, KHALED T, et al. Acute-on-chronic liver failure in Egypt: An underestimated complication of liver cirrhosis[J]. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol, 2021, 33(1s ): e458-e463. DOI: 10.1097/meg.0000000000002132 .

[23]

FERNÁNDEZ J, ACEVEDO J, WIEST R, et al. Bacterial and fungal infections in acute-on-chronic liver failure: Prevalence, characteristics and impact on prognosis[J]. Gut, 2018, 67(10): 1870-1880. DOI: 10.1136/gutjnl-2017-314240 .

[24]

KULKARNI AV, ANAND L, VYAS AK, et al. Omega-3 fatty acid lipid emulsions are safe and effective in reducing endotoxemia and sepsis in acute-on-chronic liver failure: An open-label randomized controlled trial[J]. J Gastroenterol Hepatol, 2021, 36(7): 1953-1961. DOI: 10.1111/jgh.15400 .

[25]

LIU WH, PU YL, ZHU CW, et al. Establishment of a scoring model for early diagnosis of infection associated with liver failure[J]. Ann Hepatol, 2022, 27(4): 100713. DOI: 10.1016/j.aohep.2022.100713 .

[26]

SUNDARAM V. Characterizing bacterial infections in acute-on-chronic liver failure among patients with cirrhosis from nonalcoholic steatohepatitis[J]. J Hepatol, 2021, 75(4): 1008-1009. DOI: 10.1016/j.jhep.2021.04.006 .

[27]

MARCIANO S, DÍAZ JM, DIRCHWOLF M, et al. Spontaneous bacterial peritonitis in patients with cirrhosis: Incidence, outcomes, and treatment strategies[J]. Hepat Med, 2019, 11: 13-22. DOI: 10.2147/HMER.S164250 .

[28]

TU Y, LI X, CHEN MJ, et al. Value of platelet count and related scoring models in predicting the prognosis of hepatitis B virus-related acute-on-chronic liver failure[J]. J Clin Hepatol, 2023, 39(6): 1308-1312. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-5256.2023.06.009 .

[29]

涂颖, 李雪, 陈美娟, . 血小板计数及相关评分模型对HBV相关慢加急性肝衰竭预后的预测价值[J]. 临床肝胆病杂志, 2023, 39(6): 1308-1312. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-5256.2023.06.009 .

[30]

SAWHNEY R, HOLLAND-FISCHER P, ROSSELLI M, et al. Role of ammonia, inflammation, and cerebral oxygenation in brain dysfunction of acute-on-chronic liver failure patients[J]. Liver Transpl, 2016, 22(6): 732-742. DOI: 10.1002/lt.24443 .

[31]

HU CX, HUANG KZ, ZHAO LF, et al. Serum ammonia is a strong prognostic factor for patients with acute-on-chronic liver failure[J]. Sci Rep, 2020, 10(1): 16970. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-73603-1 .

基金资助

国家重点研发计划(2021YFC2301801)

AI Summary AI Mindmap
PDF (918KB)

192

访问

0

被引

详细

导航
相关文章

AI思维导图

/