Search

Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) cases continue to increase globally. Poor outcomes in patients with COVID-19 and cirrhosis have been reported; predictors of outcome are unclear. The existing data is from the early part of the pandemic when variants of concern (VOC) were not reported. We aimed to assess the outcomes and predictors in patients with cirrhosis and COVID-19. We also compared the differences in outcomes between the first wave of pandemic and the second wave. In this retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database, data on consecutive cirrhosis patients (n = 221) admitted to the COVID-19 care facility of a tertiary care center in India were evaluated for presentation, the severity of liver disease, the severity of COVID-19, and outcomes. The clinical presentation included: 18 (8.1%) patients had compensated cirrhosis, 139 (62.9%) acute decompensation (AD), and 64 (29.0%) had an acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF). Patients with ACLF had more severe COVID-19 infection than those with compensated cirrhosis and AD (54.7% vs. 16.5% and 33.3%, P < 0.001). The overall mortality was 90 (40.7%), the highest among ACLF (72.0%). On multivariate analysis, independent predictors of mortality were high leukocyte count, alkaline phosphatase, creatinine, child class, model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score, and COVID-19 severity. The second wave had more cases of severe COVID-19 as compared to the first wave, with a similar MELD score and Child score. The overall mortality was similar between the two waves. Patients with COVID-19 and cirrhosis have high mortality (40%), particularly those with ACLF (72%). A higher leukocyte count, creatinine, alkaline phosphatase, Child class, and MELD score are predictors of mortality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction and Aim: Multiple prognostic scores are available for acute liver failure (ALF). Our objective was to compare the dynamicity of model for end stage liver disease (MELD), MELD-sodium, acute liver failure early dynamic model (ALFED), chronic liver failure (CLIF)-consortium ACLF score and King's College Hospital Criteria (KCH) for predicting outcome in ALF., Materials and Methods: All consecutive patients with ALF at a tertiary care centre in India were included. MELD, MELD-Na, ALFED, CLIF-C ACLF scores and KCH criteria were calculated at admission and day 3 of admission. Area under receiver operator characteristic curves (AUROC) were compared with DeLong method. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), likelihood ratio (LR) and diagnostic accuracy (DA) were reported., Results: Of the 115 patients included in the study, 73 (63.5%) died. The discrimination of mortality with baseline values of prognostic scores (MELD, MELD-Na, ALFED, CLIF-C ACLF and KCH) was modest (AUROC: 0.65-0.77). The AUROC increased on day 3 for all scores, except KCH criteria. On day 3 of admission, ALFED score had the highest AUROC 0.95, followed by CLIF-C ACLF 0.88, MELD 0.81, MELD-Na 0.77 and KCH 0.52. The AUROC for ALFED was significantly higher than MELD, MELD-Na and KCH (P < 0.001 for all) and CLIF-C ACLF (P = 0.05). ALFED score ≥ 4 on day 3 had the best sensitivity (87.1%), specificity (89.5%), PPV (93.8%), NPV (79.1%), LR positive (8.3) and DA (87.9%) for predicting mortality., Conclusions: Dynamic assessment of prognostic scores better predicts outcome. ALFED model performs better than MELD, MELD, MELD-Na, CLIF-C ACLF scores and KCH criteria for predicting outcome in viral hepatitis- related ALF.