From fructose to the future: liver disease biomarkers and their prognostic value in acute liver failure.

IF 6.6 2区 医学 Q1 MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY
Mitchell R McGill
{"title":"From fructose to the future: liver disease biomarkers and their prognostic value in acute liver failure.","authors":"Mitchell R McGill","doi":"10.1080/10408363.2025.2481081","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Acute liver failure (ALF) is an uncommon but severe condition with high morbidity and mortality. Advances in supportive care have improved patient outcomes, but liver transplantation remains the only life-saving intervention in many cases. Unfortunately, healthy donor livers are in short supply. In addition, transplant recipients face several potentially fatal risks including organ rejection, biliary and vascular complications, and infection. It is therefore critical to accurately identify patients who need a new liver while sparing those who do not. This also needs to be done quickly, within the first few days of hospital admission, due to the rapid progression of ALF. Prognostic tools, like the Clichy criteria, the King's College Criteria (KCC), the model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score, the Acute Liver Failure Study Group Prognostic Index (ALFSGPI), and others have been available for this purpose since at least the 1980s and are commonly used today, but their performance is imperfect, leading to many efforts over the last several decades - and especially in recent years - to identify new noninvasive biomarkers. This review begins with a description of the earliest liver function (e.g. the levulose [fructose] test) and liver injury (e.g. alkaline phosphatase [ALP] and alanine aminotransferase [ALT]) tests and continues through the most recent proposed biomarkers, with critical evaluation of the prognostic utility of each using the KCC and MELD as benchmarks for comparison. Overall, there is as-yet no single biomarker that clearly and consistently performs better than the latter tools, though many may modestly improve the performance of the KCC or MELD when used in combination with them. The search for a better, single biomarker is therefore likely to continue.</p>","PeriodicalId":10760,"journal":{"name":"Critical reviews in clinical laboratory sciences","volume":" ","pages":"1-18"},"PeriodicalIF":6.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical reviews in clinical laboratory sciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10408363.2025.2481081","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Acute liver failure (ALF) is an uncommon but severe condition with high morbidity and mortality. Advances in supportive care have improved patient outcomes, but liver transplantation remains the only life-saving intervention in many cases. Unfortunately, healthy donor livers are in short supply. In addition, transplant recipients face several potentially fatal risks including organ rejection, biliary and vascular complications, and infection. It is therefore critical to accurately identify patients who need a new liver while sparing those who do not. This also needs to be done quickly, within the first few days of hospital admission, due to the rapid progression of ALF. Prognostic tools, like the Clichy criteria, the King's College Criteria (KCC), the model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score, the Acute Liver Failure Study Group Prognostic Index (ALFSGPI), and others have been available for this purpose since at least the 1980s and are commonly used today, but their performance is imperfect, leading to many efforts over the last several decades - and especially in recent years - to identify new noninvasive biomarkers. This review begins with a description of the earliest liver function (e.g. the levulose [fructose] test) and liver injury (e.g. alkaline phosphatase [ALP] and alanine aminotransferase [ALT]) tests and continues through the most recent proposed biomarkers, with critical evaluation of the prognostic utility of each using the KCC and MELD as benchmarks for comparison. Overall, there is as-yet no single biomarker that clearly and consistently performs better than the latter tools, though many may modestly improve the performance of the KCC or MELD when used in combination with them. The search for a better, single biomarker is therefore likely to continue.

从果糖到未来:肝脏疾病生物标志物及其在急性肝衰竭中的预后价值。
急性肝衰竭(ALF)是一种罕见但严重的疾病,发病率和死亡率高。支持治疗的进步改善了患者的预后,但在许多情况下,肝移植仍然是唯一的挽救生命的干预措施。不幸的是,健康的捐献肝脏供不应求。此外,移植受者面临一些潜在的致命风险,包括器官排斥、胆道和血管并发症以及感染。因此,准确识别需要新肝脏的患者,同时保留那些不需要的患者是至关重要的。这也需要在入院的最初几天内迅速完成,因为ALF进展迅速。预后工具,如克利希标准、国王学院标准(KCC)、终末期肝病(MELD)评分模型、急性肝衰竭研究组预后指数(ALFSGPI)等,至少从20世纪80年代开始就可用于此目的,并且今天普遍使用,但它们的性能并不完美,导致过去几十年,特别是近年来,许多努力寻找新的无创生物标志物。本综述首先描述了最早的肝功能(如左苯糖[果糖]测试)和肝损伤(如碱性磷酸酶[ALP]和丙氨酸转氨酶[ALT])测试,然后继续介绍了最近提出的生物标志物,并使用KCC和MELD作为比较基准,对每种生物标志物的预后效用进行了关键评估。总的来说,目前还没有一种生物标志物明显地、持续地比后一种工具表现得更好,尽管许多生物标志物在与KCC或MELD联合使用时可能会适度提高它们的性能。因此,寻找更好的单一生物标志物的工作可能会继续下去。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
20.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
25
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Critical Reviews in Clinical Laboratory Sciences publishes comprehensive and high quality review articles in all areas of clinical laboratory science, including clinical biochemistry, hematology, microbiology, pathology, transfusion medicine, genetics, immunology and molecular diagnostics. The reviews critically evaluate the status of current issues in the selected areas, with a focus on clinical laboratory diagnostics and latest advances. The adjective “critical” implies a balanced synthesis of results and conclusions that are frequently contradictory and controversial.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信