What should we expect from a bioartificial liver in fulminant hepatic failure?
Bismuth H. Figueiro J. Samuel D.
Centre Hepatobiliaire, Assistance Publique-Hopitaux de Paris et Faculte de Medecine Paris Sud, Hopital Paul Brousse, Villejuif, France.
Fulminant hepatic failure is associated with high mortality. Liver transplantation is an effective therapy that improves survival, and because of donor organ shortage and urgency, a bioartificial liver could act as an effective bridge to liver transplantation in patients with fulminant hepatic failure. We discuss the place of the bioartificial liver in the treatment of other causes of liver failure.
A simple and early prognostic index for acute renal failure patients requiring renal replacement therapy.
Yuasa S. Takahashi N. Shoji T. Uchida K. Kiyomoto H. Hashimoto M. Fujioka H. Fujita Y. Hitomi H. Matsuo H.
The Second Department of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine, Kagawa Medical University, Japan.
Recent advances in technology have not substantially changed the high mortality rate associated with acute renal failure (ARF). To obtain a simple, valid prognostic index, we retrospectively evaluated the relative importance of demographic data, causes (acute insults) of renal failure, and comorbid clinical conditions for the outcome in 102 ARF patients who received renal replacement therapy with an overall mortality rate of 65% (66 of 102). There were no significant differences between survivors and nonsurvivors in age and gender. Mortality according to acute insults was similar to that of the whole population studied. Of the 10 clinical conditions at the time of the first renal replacement therapy, mechanical ventilation (p = 0.0002), cardiac failure (p = 0.0006), hepatic failure (p = 0.003), central nervous system dysfunction (p = 0.005), and oliguria (p = 0.04) were found to be significantly related to mortality by univariate analysis. Furthermore, multivariate analysis demonstrated that only mechanical ventilation, cardiac failure, and hepatic failure were significant risk factors. Survival was directly related to the number of significant variables in univariate analysis: zero, 89% (8 of 9); one, 62% (21 of 34); two, 19% (5 of 27); three, 10% (2 of 20); four, 0% (0 of 8); five, 0% (0 of 4). This simple and early prognostic index, derived from the assessment of clinical conditions which were easily determined at the patient's bedside, could be useful for outcome prediction in ARF patients requiring renal replacement therapy.