Hyponatremia in cirrhosis: Results of a patient population survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Low serum sodium concentration is an independent predictor of mortality in patients with cirrhosis, but its prevalence and clinical significance is unclear. To evaluate prospectively the prevalence of low serum sodium concentration and the association between serum sodium levels and severity of ascites and complications of cirrhosis, prospective data were collected on 997 consecutive patients from 28 centers in Europe, North and South America, and Asia for a period of 28 days. The prevalence of low serum sodium concentration as defined by a serum sodium concentration < or =135 mmol/L, < or =130 mmol/L, < or =125 mmol/L, and < or =120 mmol/L was 49.4%, 21.6%, 5.7%, and 1.2%, respectively. The prevalence of low serum sodium levels (<135 mmol/L) was high in both inpatients and outpatients (57% and 40%, respectively). The existence of serum sodium <135 mmol/L was associated with severe ascites, as indicated by high prevalence of refractory ascites, large fluid accumulation rate, frequent use of large-volume paracentesis, and impaired renal function, compared with normal serum sodium levels. Moreover, low serum sodium levels were also associated with greater frequency of hepatic encephalopathy, spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, and hepatorenal syndrome, but not gastrointestinal bleeding. Patients with serum sodium <130 mmol/L had the greatest frequency of these complications, but the frequency was also increased in patients with mild reduction in serum sodium levels (131-135 mmol/L). In conclusion, low serum sodium levels in cirrhosis are associated with severe ascites and high frequency of hepatic encephalopathy, spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, and hepatorenal syndrome.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".