Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Comparison of Current Diagnostic Criteria for Acute-On-Chronic Liver Failure

Fig 3

Comparison of survival between patients with and without progression to post-enrollment EASL-CLIF ACLF.

Patients with ACLF at enrollment defined by APASL criteria alone were classified into group A, while patients with ACLF at enrollment defined by both APASL and CMA criteria but not EASL-CLIF criteria were classified into group B. Among the entire 276 patients in groups A and B, patients with progression to post-enrollment EASL-CLIF ACLF had a significantly lower survival than those without (log-rank test: P < 0.001) (A). Among patients in either group A (B) or group B (C), significantly lower survival was also observed in patients with progression to post-enrollment EASL-CLIF ACLF than those without (log-rank test: P < 0.001). Abbreviations: ACLF, acute-on-chronic liver failure; EASL-CLIF, EASL-Chronic Liver Failure.

Fig 3

doi: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0122158.g003