Lifetime of patients and prognostic value of manifestations and complications of liver cirrhosis
Abstract
Aim of investigation. Studying of liver cirrhosis (LC) prevalence in Tajikistan, survival rates, lifetimes and principal causes of death of patients, and evaluation of prognostic value of manifestations and complications of LC.
Material and methods. 1374 patients of the LC were investigated. Main etiological factors of development of disease were: hepatitis virus B, hepatitis virus C, alcohol.
Results. The incidence of viral LC in Tajikistan does not differ from that in Russia and some western countries and makes 2,32 per 10 000 of adult populations. Alcohol-induced LC and primary biliary cirrhosis are over 10 and 5 times less frequent respectively. Lifetime and 3-year survival rate of patients depend on a phase of cirrhotic process compensation. The highest 3-years survival rate of patients from the moment of establishment of the diagnosis was 79% at class A LC vs 28% at class C LC. At 89% of patients the cause of death has been directly related to complications of cirrhosis. Hepatic encephalopathy and bleeding serve as certain criteria of survival rate prognosis of LC patients. Hepatorenal syndrome, bacterial peritonitis and portal vein thrombosis are independent risk factors of lethal outcomes.
Conclusions. Prognosis of survival is most unfavorable at hepatic encephalopathy in comparison to other complications of the LC. Presence more than one complication increases probability of death of patients more than 2,5 times. The relative risk of death is higher at patients with class B and C in comparison to class A.
About the Authors
G. K. MirodzhovRussian Federation
S. A. Avezov
Russian Federation
N. S. Tukhtayeva
Russian Federation
A. Bakhtibekov
Russian Federation
M. M. Giyasov
Russian Federation
References
1. Буеверов А.О. Печеночная энцефалопатия: клинические варианты и терапевтические возможности: Метод. рекомендации. – М., 2003.
2. Рачковский М.И. Прогнозирование выживаемости при циррозе печени различной этиологии: Автореф. дис. ... д-ра мед. наук. – Томск, 2009. – 39 с.
3. Силивончик Н.Н. Лечение осложнений цирроза печени: Метод. рекомендации. – Минск, 2000.
4. Alessandria C., Gaia S., Marzano A. et al. Application of the model for end-stage liver disease score for transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt in cirrhotic patients with refractory ascites and renal impairment // Eur. J. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. – 2004. – Vol. 16. – P. 607–612.
5. Bajaj J.S., Saeian K. MELD score does not discriminate against patients with hepatic encephalopathy // Dig. Dis. Sci. – 2005. – Vol. 50. – P. 753–756.
6. Biggins S.W., Rodriguez H.J., Bacchetti P. et al. Serum sodium predicts mortality in patients listed for liver transplantation // Hepatology. – 2005. – Vol. 41. – P. 32–39.
7. Cholongitas E., Papatheodoridis G.V., Vangeli M. et al. Systematic review: The model for end-stage liver disease – should it replace Child-Pugh’s classification for assessing prognosis in cirrhosis? // Aliment. Pharmacol. Ther. – 2005. – Vol. 22, N 11. – P. 1079–1089.
8. Dunn W., Jamil L.H., Brown L.S. et al. MELD accurately predicts mortality in patients with alcoholic hepatitis // Hepatology. – 2005. – Vol. 41. – P. 353–358.
9. Durand F., Valla D. Assessment of prognosis of cirrhosis // Semin. Liver Dis. – 2008. – Vol. 28, N 1. – P. 110–122.
10. Durand F., Valla D. Assessment of the prognosis of cirrhosis: Child–Pugh versus MELD // J. Hepatol. – 2005. – Vol. 42 (suppl.). – P. 100–107.
11. Fontana R.J., Hann H.W., Perrillo R.P. et al. Determinants of early mortality in patients with decompensated chronic hepatitis B treated with antiviral therapy // Gastroenterology. – 2002. – Vol. 123. – P. 719–727.
12. Gotthardt D., Weiss K., Baumgärtner M. et al. Limitations of the MELD score in predicting mortality or need for removal from waiting list in patients awaiting liver transplantation // BMC Gastroenterology. – 2009.
13. Madhotra R., Mulcahy H.E., Willner I., Reuben A. Prediction of esophageal varices in patients with cirrhosis // J. Clin. Gastroenterol. – 2002. – Vol. 34. – P. 81– 85.
14. McCall B. EASL 2009: Alcoholic liver cirrhosis with variceal bleeding and ascites has increased mortality. European Association for the Study of the Liver 44th Annual Meeting. Poster displayed April 25. – 2009.
15. Moreau R., Delègue P., Pessione F. et al. Clinical characteristics and outcome of patients with cirrhosis and refractory ascites // Liver Int. – 2004. – Vol. 24, N 5. – P. 267–275.
16. Papatheodoridis G.V., Cholongitas E., Dimitriadou E. et al. MELD vs Child–Pugh and creatinine-modified Child–Pugh score for predicting survival in patients with decompensated cirrhosis // World J. Gastroenterol. – 2005. – Vol. 11. – P. 3099–3104.
17. Saab S., Niho H., Comulada S. et al. Mortality predictors in liver transplant recipients with recurrent hepatitis C cirrhosis // Liver Int. – 2005. – Vol. 25, N 5. – P. 940–945.
18. Schiff E., Lai C.L., Hadziyannis S. et al. Adefovir dipivoxil for wait-listed and post-liver transplantation patients with lamivudine-resistant hepatitis B: final long-term results // Liver Transpl. – 2007. – Vol. 13. – P. 349–360.
19. Senzolo M., Cholongitas E., Burra P. et al. β-blockers protect against spontaneous bacterial peritonitis in cirrhotic patients: A meta-analysis // Liver Int. – 2009. – Vol. 29, N 8. – P. 1189–1193.
20. Sharma S.K., Aggarwal R. Prediction of large esophageal varices in patients with cirrhosis of the liver using clinical, laboratory and imaging parameters // J. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. – 2007. – Vol. 22, N 11. – P. 1909–1915.
21. Sheehan M., Zeifer B., Futterer S. et al. MELD scores, encephalopathy and survival in acute on chronic liver failure // Gastroenterology. – 2005. – Vol. 128. – P. 705.
22. Tandon P., Garcia-Tsao G. Prognostic indicators in hepatocellular carcinoma: A systematic review of 72 studies // Liver Int. – 2009. – Vol. 29, N 4. – P. 502– 510.
23. Teh-Ia Huo, Han-Chieh Lin, Fa-Yauh Lee et al. Occurrence of cirrhosis-related complications is a time-dependent prognostic predictor independent of baseline model for end-stage liver disease score // Liver Int. – 2006. – Vol. 26, N 1. – P. 55–61.
24. Teh-Ia Huo, Shou-Dong Lee, Han-Chieh Lin. Selecting an optimal prognostic system for liver cirrhosis: the model for end-stage liver disease and beyond // Liver Int. – 2008. – Vol. 28, N 5. – P. 606–613.
25. Yeung E., Yong E., Wong F. Renal dysfunction in cirrhosis: Diagnosis, treatment, and prevention // Medscape Gen. Med. – 2004. – Vol. 6, N 4. – P. 9.
Review
For citations:
Mirodzhov G.K., Avezov S.A., Tukhtayeva N.S., Bakhtibekov A., Giyasov M.M. Lifetime of patients and prognostic value of manifestations and complications of liver cirrhosis. Russian Journal of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, Coloproctology. 2010;20(5):27-32. (In Russ.)
Views:
56
Email this article 
