Survival in Infection-Related Acute-on-Chronic Liver Failure Is Defined by Extrahepatic Organ Failures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
UNLABELLED: Infections worsen survival in cirrhosis; however, simple predictors of survival in infection-related acute-on-chronic liver failure (I-ACLF) derived from multicenter studies are required in order to improve prognostication and resource allocation. Using the North American Consortium for Study of End-stage Liver Disease (NACSELD) database, data from 18 centers were collected for survival analysis of prospectively enrolled cirrhosis patients hospitalized with an infection. We defined organ failures as 1) shock, 2) grade III/IV hepatic encephalopathy (HE), 3) need for dialysis and mechanical ventilation. Determinants of survival with these organ failures were analyzed. In all, 507 patients were included (55 years, 52% hepatitis C virus [HCV], 15.8% nosocomial infection, 96% Child score ≥ 7) and 30-day evaluations were available in 453 patients. Urinary tract infection (UTI) (28.5%), and spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP) (22.5%) were the most prevalent infections. During hospitalization, 55.7% developed HE, 17.6% shock, 15.1% required renal replacement, and 15.8% needed ventilation; 23% died within 30 days and 21.6% developed second infections. Admitted patients developed none (38.4%), one (37.3%), two (10.4%), three (10%), or four (4%) organ failures. The 30-day survival worsened with a higher number of extrahepatic organ failures, none (92%), one (72.6%), two (51.3%), three (36%), and all four (23%). I-ACLF was defined as ≥ 2 organ failures given the significant change in survival probability associated at this cutoff. Baseline independent predictors for development of ACLF were nosocomial infections, Model for Endstage Liver Disease (MELD) score, low mean arterial pressure (MAP), and non-SBP infections. Independent predictors of poor 30-day survival were I-ACLF, second infections, and admission values of high MELD, low MAP, high white blood count, and low albumin. CONCLUSION: Using multicenter study data in hospitalized decompensated infected cirrhosis patients, I-ACLF defined by the presence of two or more organ failures using simple definitions is predictive of poor survival.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".