Renal function has a significant impact on early mortality in patients with cirrhosis. However, creatinine and creatinine-based equations are inaccurate markers of renal function in cirrhosis. The aim of this study was to reassess correlations between creatinine-based equations and measured glomerular filtration rate (GFR) and to investigate the impact of inaccuracies on the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score. GFR was measured using iohexol clearance and calculated with creatinine-based equations in 157 patients with cirrhosis during pretransplant evaluation. We compared the accuracy of creatinine to that of true GFR in a prognostic score also including bilirubin and the international normalized ratio. In patients with creatinine below 1 mg/dL, true GFR ranged from 34-163 mL/minute/1.73 m 2 . Cockcroft and Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) significantly overestimated true GFR. On multivariate analysis, younger age and ascites were significantly correlated with the overestimation of true GFR by 20% or more. Body mass index was an independent risk factor of overestimation of GFR with Cockcroft but not with MDRD. The accuracy of a prognostic score combining bilirubin, international normalized ratio, and true GFR was superior to that of MELD, whether creatinine was rounded to 1 mg/dL when lower than 1 mg/dL or not (c-statistic of 0.8 versus 0.75 and 0.73, respectively). Creatinine-based formulas overestimate true GFR, especially in patients younger than 50 years or with ascites. In patients with serum creatinine below 1 mg/dL, the spectrum of true GFR is large. True GFR seems to have a better prognostic value than creatinine and creatinine-based equations. Specific equations are needed in patients with cirrhosis to improve prognostic scores.
Cardiac complications after OLT are common and were the leading cause of death after surgery. Adverse intraoperative cardiovascular events, previous cardiac disease, and advanced liver disease as quantified by i-MELD score predicted postoperative cardiac complications.
SummaryBackgroundThe prevalence of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection in Egypt is the highest in the world, yet the total economic burden has not been quantified. Improved understanding of costs and the impact of treatment strategies will provide for better allocation of resources to reduce HCV disease and economic burden.AimA modelling approach was used to quantify the current HCV‐infected population, future disease progression and associated costs in Egypt.MethodsDirect healthcare costs were calculated from a nationally representative hospital and a disability adjusted life year (DALY) template was used with monetary value assigned to lost life years. Three scenarios were considered: (i) Historical treatment scenario: 50% SVR; 65 000 treated annually, (ii) Current treatment scenario: 90% sustained virologic response (SVR); 65 000 treated annually, (iii) Increased treatment scenario: 90% SVR; 325 000 treated annually by 2018.ResultsCumulative DALYs (2015–2030) under Scenario 1 were estimated at 7.88 million and cumulative costs estimated at $89.07 billion. Annual DALYs increased 16% during 2015–2030 while annual costs more than doubled. Scenario 2 reduced cumulative DALYs and costs by 7% and 4%, respectively. Under Scenario 3, total costs declined 73% to $1047 million during 2015–2030. As compared to Scenario 1, cumulative DALYs and costs decreased 37% and 35%, respectively.ConclusionsThis is the first estimate of the total economic burden of HCV in Egypt. Extraordinary measures are necessary to substantially reduce HCV disease and cost burden. With newer therapies, strategies to reduce disease burden are feasible and cost‐effective.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.