D-dimer level for predicting the in-hospital mortality in liver cirrhosis: A retrospective study

36Citations
Citations of this article
29Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

The present study aimed to examine the correlation of D-dimer levels with the Child-Pugh and MELD scores, as well as to determine the predictive ability of D-dimer level for the in-hospital mortality of liver cirrhosis patients. All cirrhotic patients who were consecutively admitted to our hospital between January 2011 and June 2014, and underwent D-dimer tests on admission were retrospectively analyzed. Pearson’s X2 tests were employed to evaluate the correlations of D-dimer levels with Child-Pugh and MELD scores. In addition, receiver operating curve (ROC) analysis was employed to evaluate the specificity and sensitivity of D-dimer levels for predicting the in-hospital mortality. In total, 703 cirrhotic patients were included in the study, with an in-hospital mortality of 5.4% (38/703). The D-dimer levels were correlated with Child-Pugh (correlation coefficient, 0.219; P<0.001) and MELD scores (correlation coefficient, 0.207; P<0.001). The highest D-dimer level was observed in the Child-Pugh class C patients, followed by the class B and A patients. Furthermore, D-dimer was significantly higher in the MELD score >15 group compared with the MELD score <15 group. The area under the ROC of D-dimer levels for predicting the in-hospital mortality of liver cirrhosis was 0.729 (P<0.0001), while the best cut-off D-dimer value was 0.28 µg/ml with a sensitivity of 86.84% and a specificity of 49.17%. In conclusion, the D-dimer level is significantly associated with the degree of liver dysfunction. Therefore, D-dimer testing could be employed for the prognostic stratification of liver cirrhosis.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Li, Y., Qi, X., Li, H., Dai, J., Deng, H., Li, J., … Guo, X. (2017). D-dimer level for predicting the in-hospital mortality in liver cirrhosis: A retrospective study. Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine, 13(1), 285–289. https://doi.org/10.3892/etm.2016.3930

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free