• <tr id="yyy80"></tr>
  • <sup id="yyy80"></sup>
  • <tfoot id="yyy80"><noscript id="yyy80"></noscript></tfoot>
  • 99热精品在线国产_美女午夜性视频免费_国产精品国产高清国产av_av欧美777_自拍偷自拍亚洲精品老妇_亚洲熟女精品中文字幕_www日本黄色视频网_国产精品野战在线观看 ?

    A retrospective study on use of palliative care for patients with alcohol related end stage liver disease in United States

    2022-10-08 05:42:40KameshGuptaBandhulHansAhmadKhanSyedHamzaSohailDevikaKapuriaChrisChang
    World Journal of Hepatology 2022年9期

    Kamesh Gupta, Bandhul Hans, Ahmad Khan, Syed Hamza Sohail, Devika Kapuria, Chris Chang

    Kamesh Gupta, Department of Gastroenterology, UMass Chan Medical School-Baystate, Springfield, MA 01199, United States

    Βandhul Hans, Department of Internal Medicine, Allegheny General Hospital, Pittsburgh, PA 15212, United States

    Ahmad Khan, Department of Gastroenterology, Case Western University, Cleveland, OH 44106, United States

    Syed Hamza Sohail, Department of Internal Medicine, UMass Chan Medical School-Baystate, Springfield, MA 01199, United States

    Devika Kapuria, Department of Gastroenterology, Washington University, St. Louis, MO 63110, United States

    Chris Chang, Department of Gastroenterology, University of New Mexico, Alberquerque, NM 46111, United States

    Abstract BACKGROUND Palliative care (PC) has been shown to be beneficial in end stage liver disease (ESLD), yet the hospitalization data for PC utilization is unknown.AIM To identify the trend of PC utilization for the special population of alcoholassociated ESLD patients, factors affecting its use and ascertain its impact on healthcare utilization.METHODS We analyzed around 78 million discharges from the 2007-2014 national inpatient sample and 2010-2014 national readmission database including adult patients admitted for decompensated alcohol-associated cirrhosis. We identified patients with PC consultation as a secondary diagnosis. Odds ratios (OR) and means were adjusted for confounders using multivariate regression analysis models.RESULTS Out of the total 1421849 hospitalizations for decompensated liver cirrhosis, 62782 (4.4%) hospitalizations had a PC consult, which increased from 0.8% (1258) of all alcohol-associated ESLD hospitalizations in 2007 to 6.6% in 2014 (P < 0.01). Patient and hospital characteristics associated with increased odds of PC utilization were advanced age, lower income, Medicaid coverage, teaching institution, urban location, length of stay > 3 d, prolonged ventilation, and administration of total parenteral nutrition (all P < 0.01). Palliative encounters in alcohol-associated ESLD and acute-onchronic liver failure (ACLF) score were associated with increased odds of discharge to a rehabilitation facility, but significantly lower odds of 30-d readmissions (aOR: 0.35, 95%CI: 0.31-0.41), lower total hospitalization charges and lower mean hospitalization days (all P < 0.01).CONCLUSION Inpatient PC is sparingly used for patients with decompensated alcohol related liver disease, however it has increased over the past decade. PC consultation is associated with lower 30-d readmission rates on multivariate analysis, and lower hospitalization cost and length of stay in patients with ACLF score ≥ 2.

    Key Words: Alcohol-associated cirrhosis; Palliative care; End stage liver disease; National inpatient sample; National readmission database

    lNTRODUCTlON

    Cirrhosis represents advanced chronic progressive liver disease, which eventually may lead to end stage liver disease (ESLD)[1]. ESLD is defined as the manifestations of decompensated liver cirrhosis or liver failure such as variceal hemorrhage, ascites, spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), hepatorenal syndrome, or hepatopulmonary syndrome[2]. While treatments are available to prevent further fibrosis and liver damage, once the disease reaches the stage of cirrhosis, the only existing cure is liver transplantation.

    Alcoholic liver disease (ALD) presents a significant burden to our healthcare system, and contributes to 48% of cirrhosis related deaths in the United States. ALD comprises a broad spectrum of disease, ranging from early ALD to alcohol-associated steatohepatitis and advanced ALD, requiring liver transplantation. While in recent years, the number of patients with ALD receiving a liver transplant has increased, it is still a miniscule percentage of the patients with ALD[3]. A study from the United Nation for Organ Sharing Database found that the number of transplants for ALD was stable between 2002 and 2012, but rose by approximately 177 transplants per year between 2013 and 2015[4]. Meanwhile, the prevalence of alcohol-associated cirrhosis is increasing in the United States. In a privately insured population, the alcohol-associated cirrhosis prevalence rate increased by 43% over the course of a 7-year period from 2009 to 2015[5].

    Patients with ESLD often experience symptoms such as abdominal pain secondary to ascites, fatigue, anorexia, depression and confusion[6]. As a result of the physical and psychological effects of ESLD, quality of life is often severely impacted. In fact, patients with ESLD have been shown to have a quality of life similar to patients with end stage heart or lung disease, as well as a symptom burden similar to patients with colorectal cancer[7,8]. Palliative care (PC) has shown to be effective in improving quality of life, decreasing economic burden of disease as well as improving survival in oncology, however its use in advanced liver disease has been limited. A study by Barneset al[9] showed an early palliative care referral of only 19% in 74 admitted patients. Only 17% of patients taken off the transplant list were actually referred to palliative care, and death occurred within 70 h of referral in half of these patients[10].

    Palliative care is of special importance in patients with alcohol-associated liver disease as the life expectancy of patients with alcohol-associated cirrhosis is very low, 5-year and 10-year survival rates are 23 percent and 7 percent, respectively[11]. These rates are significantly worse than survival rates for patients whose cirrhosis was not caused by alcohol. These factors make early intervention by palliative care greatly beneficial to patients with alcohol-associated cirrhosis.

    Due to the combination of disadvantageous positions for alcohol-dependent patients to secure a liver transplantation, poorer prognosis in this cohort, and the negative association of alcohol-associated liver disease patients to have a palliative care referral we aimed to study the implications of palliative care consult for this population[9]. In this study, we evaluate the use of palliative care for patients with decompensated alcohol-associated liver disease while they are admitted to the hospital for inpatient care in the United States.

    MATERlALS AND METHODS

    Data acquisition

    We performed a retrospective, multicenter, observational study using data from two national databases, nationwide inpatient sample (NIS) from 2007 to 2014, and national readmission database (NRD) from 2010 to 2014. We utilized NIS until 2014 because the International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes utilized by NIS have differed from the year 2015 to incorporate ICD-10 codes. We used different time periods for the two databases as NRD came into existence from the year 2010, unlike NIS which began from 1997. Both of these databases are a part of the healthcare cost and utilization project maintained by the agency for healthcare research and quality. The NIS is an administrative database consisting (until 2012) of all hospitalizations drawn from a sample of 20% of United States hospitals, and then weighted to be nationally representative of all United States hospitalizations[12]. NRD represents about half of all United States Hospitalizations, and provides a national estimate of readmission rates[13].

    We performed separate analysis on both of the databases owing to their unique characteristics. The data cannot be merged from the two databases as the identifying information in both is encoded as different numbers. The NIS database provides information regarding the index hospital admission and includes patient demographic data, primary and secondary diagnosis, procedures, hospital characteristics, and inpatient and discharge mortality rates. Each record includes one primary and up to 24 discharge diagnoses, procedure codes, demographic data, hospitalized inpatient mortality indicator, payer status, total hospitalization charges and length of stay[10]. The NRD in addition to the information provided by NIS, also assigns a unique, unidentified patient association number to each patient, and tracks all patients at each hospital in each state throughout the calendar year.

    Cohort selection

    We used International Classification of Diseases, 9thRevision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) codes to identify primary and secondary diagnosis codes of interest. To identify patients with end stage alcoholassociated liver disease, an entry was required to have the following diagnosis: (1) Diagnosis code for alcohol-associated cirrhosis (571.2) along with a diagnosis code for a decompensating event [defined by ICD-9-CM code of bleeding esophageal varices (456.0, 456.21), ascites (789.5, 789.59), and hepatic encephalopathy (572.2)]; and (2) Diagnosis code for other cirrhosis (571.5) with an alcohol disorder/comorbidity (571.1, 291x, 303x, 305x, 790.3, 980x, E860), and an event of decompensation (as defined above). This combination of ICD-9-CM codes for cirrhosis and complications has a positive predictive value of 78%, a negative predictive value of 91% for cirrhosis, with a c-statistic of 0.71[14].

    We excluded patients who were less than 18 years old at the time of admission or who were transferred from another health facility. In keeping with the North American Consortium for the Study of End-Stage Liver Disease (NACSELD) exclusion criteria, we omitted patients with a history of prior liver transplant, human immunodeficiency virus or actively pregnant. Palliative care consultation was identified using the ICD codes (ICD 9: V66.7, ICD 10: Z51.5). Other factors such as cirrhosis complications, in-hospital death, medical complications, intensive care unit care, length of hospitalization and costs were examined as dependent variables. Independent variables included were age, sex, race, payer source (commercial or health maintenance organization, Medicare, Medicaid, self-pay, or other), comorbidity, nature of admission (emergent/urgent, or other), hospital bed-size, hospital location (rural or urban), geographic region and hospital teaching status. Figure 1 depicts the flow of the study cohort. The diagnostic codes associated with these diagnoses are shown in supporting Table 1.

    Variables and statistical analysis

    Data were analyzed using Stata 15.0 (StataCorp, College Station, TX). Pearsonχ2test was used to compare proportions between the patients with PC and without PC. Associations between variables were analyzed using cross-tabulations and multivariate logistic regression modeling. Data were weighted and modified hospital and discharge weights to correct for changes in sampling over time were applied. Variance estimation was performed using procedures for survey data analysis with replacement. Strata with one sampling unit were centered at the population mean. Multivariable regression analysis models were used to adjust the results for potential confounders. Multivariable regression models were built by including all confounders that were significantly associated with the outcome of univariable analysis with a cutoffP-value of 0.05. The model controlled for age, sex, race, median household income of residents in the patient's zip code, insurance, charlson comorbidity index, hospital bedsize, academic status of hospital, hospital location, length of stay, acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) score, history of hepatocellular carcinoma, acute infections, transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) and total parenteral nutrition (TPN). Logistic regression was used for binary

    outcomes and linear regression was used for continuous outcomes.

    Table 1 Βaseline characteristics of cohort

    HRS: Hepatorenal syndrome; SBP: Spontaneous bacterial peritonitis; NACSELD-ACLF: North American Consortium for the Study of End-Stage Liver Disease's definition of acute-on-chronic liver failure; ACLF: Acute-on-chronic liver failure.

    Figure 1 lnclusion figure. HIV: Human immunodeficiency virus.

    Outcomes variables

    Our primary outcome of interest was the proportion of decompensated liver cirrhosis patients who received a PC consult during their hospitalization and their trend over the study period. Secondary outcomes were: (1) All-cause in-hospital mortality; (2) Healthcare total hospital charge; (3) Duration of hospitalization [Length of stay (LOS) in days], which were all encoded in the data set as unique variables; and (4) Major in hospital procedures and portal hypertensive complications, and these were compared between the two groups. We further categorized patients according to the number of organ failures based upon the NACSELD-ACLF, a bedside tool to predict short-term mortality in ESLD patients. This score has been previously validated using the NIS. A positive ACLF score is deemed as ≥ 2. We also included other complications of cirrhosis such as portal hypertension, hepatorenal syndrome and spontaneous bacterial peritonitis. We also identified procedures commonly performed in ESLD hospitalizations such as total parenteral nutrition, TIPS and prolonged mechanical ventilation.

    RESULTS

    There was a total of 2059524 hospitalizations for alcohol-associated cirrhosis recorded, out of which 973246 met our inclusion criteria of presenting with a portal complication. The majority of the patients were male (73.1%), white (67%), had a mean Charlson comorbidity index < 3 (83.6%) and belonged to the age group 46-65 years (68%). The mean age was 54.7 years. A palliative care encounter was recorded in only 4.8% of cases (n= 47423). On trending the utilization of palliative care, it was observed to have increased from 0.8% (956) of all ESLD hospitalizations in 2007 to 6.6% (9430) in 2014. Figure 2 depicts the trend of hospitalizations in both groups.

    Figure 2 Trend of palliative consults in hospitalized alcohol-associated end stage liver disease patients.

    Factors affecting palliative care encounter

    A palliative care encounter was more likely in female patients (29.6%vs28.4%P <0.01), patients older than 65 years (27.7%vs20.7%,P <0.01), whites (70.5%vs66.4%,P <0.01), Charlson comorbidity score ≥ 3 (95%vs87.4%,P <0.01) and medicare patients (37.7%vs35.5%,P <0.01), but was less likely for hispanic patients (13.8%vs17.4%,P <0.01), patients belonging to the lowest quarter of mean income (29.3%vs30.6%,P= 0.003) and patients with medicaid (25.4%vs26.9%,P <0.001) or no insurance at all (11%vs11.8%,P <0.01). With regards to hospital characteristics, a significantly higher proportion of patients receiving palliative care were treated at teaching hospitals (60.5%vs52.6%,P <0.01), in urban locations (93.6%vs91.5%,P <0.01), large hospitals (62.7%vs60.6%,P <0.01) and in western states (29.5%vs25.6%,P <0.001), whereas patients in northeastern states (14.4%vs18.4%,P <0.01) were less likely to receive an inpatient palliative care consult.

    On analyzing complications related with cirrhosis, patients receiving palliative care as inpatients had a significantly higher proportion of hepatic encephalopathy (51%vs34 %,P <0.001), ascites (72%vs61%,P <0.001), hepatorenal syndrome (23%vs8%,P <0.001), spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (3.5%vs2.3%,P <0.001) and HCC (12%vs5%,P <0.001), whereas patients with variceal bleeding (10%vs12%,P <0.001) were less likely to receive a palliative care. Palliative care consults were more common in all patients with North American Consortium for the Study of End-Stage Liver Disease's definition of acute-on-chronic liver failure (NACSELD-ACLF) score ≥ 1, with the proportion increasing by each grade (Grade 1: 48.1%vs39.6%; Grade 2: 18%vs6.1%; Grade 3: 9.5%vs2%; Grade 4: 0.9%vs0.1%, allP <0.001).

    In the palliative care cohort, more people received total parenteral nutrition, or TPN (2.9%vs1.4%,P <0.001) however, a lower number were liver transplant recipients (0.6%vs1.8%,P <0.001). There was no difference in receiving a transjugular intrahepatic systemic shunt, or TIPS (1.2%vs1.3%,P= 0.359) between the two groups.

    Multivariate logistic regression analysis of predictor variables for palliative consultation associated with alcohol related ESLD is shown in Table 2. After controlling for all other variables, hepatorenal syndrome (aOR: 3.4, 95%CI: 3.04-3.81,P <0.001), ascites (aOR: 1.13, 95%CI: 1.03-1.24,P= 0.007), spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP) (aOR: 3.32, 95%CI: 2.65-3.86,P <0.001) and HCC (aOR: 1.78, 95%CI: 1.58-2.00,P <0.001) were associated with higher odds of palliative care encounter than alcohol related ESLD patients. Patients with ACLF scores ≥ 2 were associated with higher odds of palliative care consult (aOR: 1.02 95%CI: 1.00-1.04,P <0.001). Patient and hospital characteristics associated with increased palliative care utilization on multivariate regression were advanced age (aOR: 1.02, 95%CI: 1.00-1.04,P <0.001), female sex (aOR: 1.07, 95%CI: 1.00-1.14,P <0.001), uninsured (aOR: 1.52, 95%CI: 1.36-1.7,P <0.001), teaching institution (aOR: 1.4, 95%CI: 1.28-1.53,P <0.001), hospital bedsize > 400 beds (aOR: 1.25, 95%CI: 1.1-1.41,P <0.001), and length of stay > 5 d (aOR: 1.18, 95%CI: 1.10-1.26,P <0.001). Major infections during the hospitalization, as described above, had higher odds of palliative care use (aOR: 1.58, 95%CI: 1.48-1.69,P <0.001). Other patient characteristics with increased odds of palliative consult included mechanical ventilation (OR: 3.32 95%CI: 3.1-3.54,P <0.01), and administration of TPN (OR: 2.02, 95%CI: 1.8-2.27,P <0.01).

    Table 2 Multivariate regression for palliative consult

    ACLF: Acute-on-chronic liver failure.

    Effect of palliative care use on hospital outcomes

    On multivariate analysis, total hospitalization charges (regression coefficient: $1813, 95%CI: -1106 to 4734,P= 0.224) and length of stay (regression coefficient: 0.342, 95%CI: -1.031 to 1.71,P= 0.625) were unchanged in patients with PC. Looking at patients who were NACSELD ACLF positive (ACLF ≥ 2), we saw that palliative care was associated with significantly reduced total hospitalization charges (regression coefficient: -$8405, 95%CI: -16721 to -90,P= 0.048) and length of stay (regression coefficient: -2.34 d, 95%CI: -2.88 to -1.81 d,P <0.001).

    Effect of palliative care consult on readmission rates

    Utilizing the NRD 2010-2014, a total of 356215 patients with alcohol related ESLD met the inclusion criteria, out of which 164940 patients were readmitted, leading to a 30-d readmission rate of 46.3%. Table 3 shows the factors associated with readmission rates. On univariate analysis, we found palliative care, age, charlson comorbidity index, hospital location, teaching status, ACLF score and infection had a statistically significant association with readmission rates. We used these factors to analyze the association of PC with 30-d readmission rate with cox multivariate regression model. PC consult was associated with significantly lower odds of 30-d readmissions (aOR: 0.35, 95%CI: 0.31-0.41,P <0.001). Other factors found to be associated were age (aOR: 0.99, 95%CI: 0.99-0.99,P <0.001), charlson comorbidity index (aOR: 1.06, 95%CI: 1.05-1.06,P <0.001), positive ACLF (aOR: 0.86, 95%CI: 0.81-0.91,P <0.001), infection (aOR: 1.09, 95%CI: 1.07-1.13,P <0.001) and hospital located in rural area (aOR: 0.86, 95%CI: 0.81-0.91,P <0.001).

    Table 3 Results of regression analysis looking at the factors associated with 30-d readmission rate

    DlSCUSSlON

    In this large, nationally representative analysis of patients with alcohol-assocaited ESLD, only a small proportion of patients (4.4%) received palliative care. The rate is lower as compared to PC consultations for advanced cancers which was recorded at 9.9% using NIS[15]. While still low, there has been an encouraging increase in the utilization of palliative care from less than 1% in 2007 to almost 7 % of all inpatient encounters in 2014. This is comparable to an increase in PC consults in inpatients with allcause ESLD, reported by Rushet al[16] over a similar time period, and can be attributed to the increased recognition of the role PC plays in improving quality of life and reducing disease burden.

    We identified geographical, socioeconomic as well as racial disparities in PC referrals. This may be due to an incomplete understanding of the concept of palliative care amongst some patient populations, such as the hispanic population. In addition, access to healthcare services was also a significant factor as PC referrals were more common in large and urban hospitals. This follows the trend oncologists have reported amongst minorities and low-income groups[17].

    As expected, sicker patients were more likely to receive palliative consults. Patients with ≥ 4 ACLF score had ten times higher odds of a palliative consult as compared to patients with a score of zero. The ACLF score has been shown to have better predictive value. Patients who presented with variceal bleeding as a symptom of decompensated alcohol related ESLD were less likely to receive PC consults, this could be because of effective endoscopic interventions available compared to the more insidious and perhaps more advanced illness indicated by ascites and hepatorenal syndrome. Similarly, patients with HCC were more likely to receive PC consults, the oncological nature of their disease perhaps facilitating recognition of the need for palliative care. Hudsonet al[18] have introduced a model to identify patients at high risk of impending death in patients with decompensated cirrhosis, which included patients with presence of 3 or more factors on admission to the emergency department, a history of 2 or more admissions in the prior 6 mo, ongoing alcohol use in the context of known alcoholrelated liver disease, unsuitability for liver transplant, and World Health Organization Performance status 3 or 4 predicted 1-year mortality with a sensitivity of 72%.

    Increased PC use seen in patients with prolonged ventilation and TPN suggest a delayed referral to PC, occurring after significant progression of disease. The timing of palliative care is important, and early PC has been shown to improve quality of life and prolong survival in other patient populations[19] and may help avoid aggressive and futile treatments[20]. Previous data has shown that alcoholassociated ESLD patients are more likely to have a delayed PC referral, with young age and recent alcohol use found to be predictors of late hospice referrals[21]. We saw that inpatients with positive ACLF score, length of stay and total hospitalization charges were significantly reduced with the use of PC services. This is likely as patients with positive ACLF score have a 6-mo mortality rate of 90%, thus meeting the criteria for hospice care as per medicare rules and are likely to have PC involved[22,23]. On analyzing the national readmission database, we found that PC was associated with a significantly reduced odds of 30-d readmission in alcohol associated ESLD patients, with an adjusted odds ratio of 0.35 on multivariate analysis, accounting for several factors found to be associated with readmission rates such as age and ACLF score. We found that the rate of readmissions in our cohort of alcoholassociated ESLD patients with C use was lower than that of all ESLD patients which has been studied before[24,25]. Also, utilization of PC was lower than all-ESLD patients, where it was 5.3%vs4.4% for our cohort of patients.

    Our study has several limitations. First, inherent to the nature of our retrospective discharge database, our analysis is limited by the errors in coding as well as missing data. Additionally, we were unable to identify interventions performed to alleviate decompensating events, and whether successful interventions reduced the referral to PC. The period over which our data has been collected has also witnessed changes in the management of alcohol related ESLD, with a significant increase in ALD liver transplantation. While survival in alcohol-associated cirrhosis remains low, increased transplantation potentially reduces the number of alcohol related ESLD patients. Our study does not account for this increase in liver transplantation.

    Despite these limitations, the study has many advantages. To date, this is the largest study that measures the utilization of palliative care and its impact on the care of patients with alcohol associated liver disease. We utilized the largest and most inclusive readmission database in the United States. These data are collected from all hospitals in 22 states, so these data are reasonably generalizable, and we hope they will increase the validity of our study. We provided the first national estimate of 30-d readmission risk specifically for alcohol-associated ESLD which are known to have poorer access to healthcare in general and liver transplantation in particular. Also, we were able to grade patients using ACLF scoring to better ascertain the referral rate for palliative care depending on the clinical condition of these patients.

    The increase in adoption of PC for alcohol related ESLD suggests an increasing recognition of the role PC plays in mitigating symptom burden and improving quality of life in these patients. Early palliative care referrals[26], and easier access to high quality palliative care should be an integral part of managing patients with alcohol related ESLD, and special attention needs to be paid to ensure inclusion of ethnic minorities and patients of low socioeconomic status.

    CONCLUSlON

    Inpatient palliative care is sparingly used for patients with decompensated alcohol related liver disease, however it has increased over the past decade. Palliative care referral is associated with decreased hospitalization cost and length of stay in ACLF positive alcohol-associated ESLD patients, as well as decreased rehospitalization rates in all alcohol-associated ESLD patients.

    ARTlCLE HlGHLlGHTS

    Research background

    Use of palliative care (PC) consultation has been steadily increasing, especially in the field of cirrhosis.

    Research motivation

    Alcohol-associated end stage li ver disease (ESLD) patients are at a disadvantage for being referred to palliative care as they are younger and are more likely to belong to lower socioeconomic strata. The use of palliative care is especially important for this subgroup as the only definite treatment is liver

    transplant which is often not an option for these patients.

    Research objectives

    To assess the trend of PC use in patients hospitalized with alcohol associated ESLD as the primary diagnosis, study the baseline characteristics of these patients, evaluate the factors associated with increased PC use, study the impact of PC use on hospitalization outcomes and 30-d readmission rates.

    Research methods

    We used the national inpatient sample from 2007 to 2014, and the national readmission database from 2010 to 2014. We identified the patients admitted with alcoholic cirrhosis and at least one cirrhosis decompensation event. We identified patients with PC consultation as a secondary diagnosis. Baseline characteristics between the groups were compared with linear regression, and multivariate regression analysis model was used to assess the impact that PC use has on the hospitalization outcomes.

    Research results

    PC use has increased over 8 times during the study period and was used in 6.6% of alcohol-associated ESLD hospitalizations in 2014. PC use was more common in patients with ascites, hepatic encephalopathy and hepatocelluluar carcinoma. Other factors associated with increased PC use were females,whites, uninsured patients, teaching hospitals and patients with a higher North American Consortium for the Study of End-Stage Liver Disease's definition of acute-on-chronic liver failure score. The length of stay and total hospitalization costs were lower in patients with acute-on-chronic liver failure score ≥ 2 and receiving PC, but not significantly different in the overall cohort. PC use was associated with significantly lower 30-d readmission rates, with odds ratios of 0.35.

    Research conclusions

    PC use has been increasing over the years, however is still underutilized especially in select population and in rural areas. We show that PC use is associated with decreased length of stay in patients with more complications, and also leads to decreased 30-d readmission rates.

    Research perspectives

    This study calls for further research to assess the point during the disease course in which patients with alcohol-associated ESLD would benefit from PC use. Further research should also be conducted to assess for the reasons for decreased PC use in select disadvantaged population.

    FOOTNOTES

    Author contributions:Hans B and Gupta K contributed equally to this manuscript and should be considered co-first authors; Chang C and Kapuria D have equal contribution and are joint senior authors; Hans B and Gupta K devised the statistical analysis plan, wrote the statistical code and contributed in writing the manuscript; Kapuria D conceived the study idea and contributed in writing the manuscript; Khan A ran the statistical tests; Sohail SH performed a background literature search; Chang C was our faculty mentor who revised and edited the final manuscript; all authors provided critical feedback and helped shape the research analysis and manuscript.

    lnstitutional review board statement:Since the paper contains data from a nationalized, publicly available, deidentified database, the paper is exempted for institutional review board.

    lnformed consent statement:Since the paper contains data from a nationalized, publicly available, de-identified database, the paper is exempted for institutional review board. Further, no patient consent was required for the same as no intervention was performed during the study.

    Conflict-of-interest statement:There are no conflicts of interest to report.

    Data sharing statement:The database utlized is available with permission at https://www.hcupus.ahrq.gov/db/nation/nis/nisdbdocumentation.jsp.

    STROΒE statement:The authors have read the STROBE Statement—checklist of items, and the manuscript was prepared and revised according to the STROBE Statement—checklist of items.

    Open-Access:This article is an open-access article that was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial (CC BYNC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is noncommercial. See: https://creativecommons.org/Licenses/by-nc/4.0/

    Country/Territory of origin:United States

    ORClD number:Kamesh Gupta 0000-0002-1033-0404; Bandhul Hans 0000-0002-2432-3846; Ahmad Khan 0000-0002-4799-3877; Syed Hamza Sohail 0000-0002-9068-763X; Devika Kapuria 0000-0001-9565-9868; Chris Chang 0000-0001-5732-9497.

    S-Editor:Wang DM

    L-Editor:A

    P-Editor:Wang DM

    色网站视频免费| 亚洲精品成人av观看孕妇| 国产亚洲av高清不卡| 极品少妇高潮喷水抽搐| 久久精品aⅴ一区二区三区四区| 欧美激情 高清一区二区三区| 19禁男女啪啪无遮挡网站| 亚洲av电影在线进入| 91国产中文字幕| 婷婷丁香在线五月| 亚洲,一卡二卡三卡| 国产精品久久久久久精品电影小说| 午夜视频精品福利| 国产日韩欧美视频二区| 亚洲图色成人| 亚洲av美国av| 人体艺术视频欧美日本| 国产三级黄色录像| 日韩一本色道免费dvd| 女警被强在线播放| 欧美中文综合在线视频| 久久久久久久精品精品| 一本综合久久免费| 亚洲专区国产一区二区| 一本久久精品| www日本在线高清视频| 亚洲欧美中文字幕日韩二区| 欧美性长视频在线观看| 国产亚洲av高清不卡| 亚洲中文字幕日韩| 日韩一区二区三区影片| 2021少妇久久久久久久久久久| 50天的宝宝边吃奶边哭怎么回事| 人人澡人人妻人| 亚洲国产欧美网| 丰满少妇做爰视频| 中文乱码字字幕精品一区二区三区| 9热在线视频观看99| av国产精品久久久久影院| av片东京热男人的天堂| 亚洲av国产av综合av卡| 大香蕉久久网| 亚洲成人免费av在线播放| 久久国产精品影院| 黄网站色视频无遮挡免费观看| 日韩一区二区三区影片| 亚洲伊人色综图| 丁香六月天网| 亚洲男人天堂网一区| 成年人免费黄色播放视频| 国产亚洲欧美在线一区二区| 亚洲av欧美aⅴ国产| 又大又爽又粗| 色婷婷av一区二区三区视频| 男女高潮啪啪啪动态图| 精品第一国产精品| 一级毛片我不卡| 欧美国产精品va在线观看不卡| av不卡在线播放| 亚洲国产精品成人久久小说| 久久久久久人人人人人| 亚洲少妇的诱惑av| 国产免费现黄频在线看| 亚洲精品乱久久久久久| 国产精品久久久久久精品电影小说| 精品国产一区二区三区四区第35| 老鸭窝网址在线观看| xxx大片免费视频| 中文字幕精品免费在线观看视频| 日韩大片免费观看网站| 欧美日韩亚洲国产一区二区在线观看 | 桃花免费在线播放| 人妻人人澡人人爽人人| 男人添女人高潮全过程视频| 欧美在线一区亚洲| av天堂久久9| 国产亚洲av高清不卡| kizo精华| 后天国语完整版免费观看| xxxhd国产人妻xxx| 欧美+亚洲+日韩+国产| 亚洲中文av在线| 18禁黄网站禁片午夜丰满| 真人做人爱边吃奶动态| 精品人妻一区二区三区麻豆| 亚洲七黄色美女视频| 精品欧美一区二区三区在线| 在现免费观看毛片| 国产精品香港三级国产av潘金莲 | 热re99久久精品国产66热6| 欧美黄色片欧美黄色片| 亚洲色图 男人天堂 中文字幕| 精品一区二区三区av网在线观看 | 国产高清国产精品国产三级| 午夜两性在线视频| 女人久久www免费人成看片| 日本wwww免费看| 一区二区三区乱码不卡18| 女人高潮潮喷娇喘18禁视频| 天天操日日干夜夜撸| 午夜久久久在线观看| 日韩 亚洲 欧美在线| 久久毛片免费看一区二区三区| 一级,二级,三级黄色视频| 丰满人妻熟妇乱又伦精品不卡| 亚洲欧美激情在线| 久久鲁丝午夜福利片| 精品国产乱码久久久久久小说| 丁香六月欧美| 亚洲欧美色中文字幕在线| 永久免费av网站大全| 午夜久久久在线观看| 久久人人爽人人片av| 久久av网站| 99香蕉大伊视频| 国产成人精品久久二区二区免费| 美女午夜性视频免费| 中国美女看黄片| 久久久久久久久免费视频了| 国产在线一区二区三区精| 色网站视频免费| 大码成人一级视频| 啦啦啦啦在线视频资源| 成在线人永久免费视频| √禁漫天堂资源中文www| 黄网站色视频无遮挡免费观看| 91精品三级在线观看| 亚洲欧美成人综合另类久久久| 国产精品人妻久久久影院| 亚洲欧美一区二区三区久久| 午夜福利一区二区在线看| 一区二区三区精品91| av在线播放精品| 亚洲av成人不卡在线观看播放网 | 国产麻豆69| 好男人视频免费观看在线| av线在线观看网站| av网站免费在线观看视频| 久久午夜综合久久蜜桃| 亚洲专区中文字幕在线| 免费观看人在逋| 精品欧美一区二区三区在线| 亚洲精品成人av观看孕妇| 捣出白浆h1v1| 精品久久蜜臀av无| 国产亚洲一区二区精品| 色94色欧美一区二区| 在线av久久热| 午夜两性在线视频| 大陆偷拍与自拍| 高清av免费在线| 一级黄片播放器| 亚洲国产日韩一区二区| 久久久久视频综合| 国产精品一二三区在线看| 女性生殖器流出的白浆| 亚洲欧洲日产国产| 国产精品免费视频内射| 捣出白浆h1v1| 2018国产大陆天天弄谢| 老汉色∧v一级毛片| 亚洲人成77777在线视频| 少妇人妻久久综合中文| 老司机在亚洲福利影院| 日韩,欧美,国产一区二区三区| 最新在线观看一区二区三区 | 久久女婷五月综合色啪小说| 中文字幕人妻熟女乱码| 欧美97在线视频| 搡老岳熟女国产| 老司机影院毛片| 国产精品秋霞免费鲁丝片| 亚洲国产精品999| 夜夜骑夜夜射夜夜干| 午夜福利免费观看在线| 欧美精品一区二区免费开放| 久久久国产一区二区| 亚洲自偷自拍图片 自拍| 国产日韩欧美视频二区| av线在线观看网站| 国产一卡二卡三卡精品| 肉色欧美久久久久久久蜜桃| 久久99精品国语久久久| 亚洲综合色网址| 欧美日韩国产mv在线观看视频| 国产精品久久久久久精品古装| 国产欧美日韩一区二区三 | av天堂在线播放| 人妻一区二区av| 一级片免费观看大全| 国产97色在线日韩免费| 午夜91福利影院| 乱人伦中国视频| 久久人妻熟女aⅴ| 久久热在线av| 97在线人人人人妻| 亚洲国产欧美一区二区综合| 国产免费一区二区三区四区乱码| 蜜桃在线观看..| 亚洲伊人久久精品综合| 午夜两性在线视频| 大话2 男鬼变身卡| 看免费av毛片| 午夜免费观看性视频| av福利片在线| 侵犯人妻中文字幕一二三四区| 黄色视频不卡| 男女国产视频网站| 免费黄频网站在线观看国产| 汤姆久久久久久久影院中文字幕| 精品久久久精品久久久| 亚洲精品一二三| 日韩人妻精品一区2区三区| 国产精品人妻久久久影院| 亚洲欧美一区二区三区久久| 亚洲欧美色中文字幕在线| 大陆偷拍与自拍| 久久这里只有精品19| 日本av手机在线免费观看| 一边摸一边做爽爽视频免费| 国产一卡二卡三卡精品| 在线观看免费日韩欧美大片| 久久午夜综合久久蜜桃| 热re99久久精品国产66热6| 国产一卡二卡三卡精品| 欧美精品一区二区免费开放| 亚洲国产精品一区三区| 女人被躁到高潮嗷嗷叫费观| 欧美人与善性xxx| 最新的欧美精品一区二区| 激情五月婷婷亚洲| 亚洲精品在线美女| 国产免费现黄频在线看| 一本色道久久久久久精品综合| 9191精品国产免费久久| tube8黄色片| 欧美日韩亚洲综合一区二区三区_| 久久久久精品国产欧美久久久 | 国产精品久久久av美女十八| 在线观看免费午夜福利视频| 妹子高潮喷水视频| 色精品久久人妻99蜜桃| 免费在线观看视频国产中文字幕亚洲 | 在线精品无人区一区二区三| 国产麻豆69| 国产在视频线精品| 免费少妇av软件| 精品久久久久久久毛片微露脸 | 欧美激情极品国产一区二区三区| 伊人亚洲综合成人网| 免费久久久久久久精品成人欧美视频| av不卡在线播放| 欧美在线黄色| 亚洲av欧美aⅴ国产| 欧美国产精品va在线观看不卡| 国产野战对白在线观看| 免费女性裸体啪啪无遮挡网站| 欧美黄色淫秽网站| 免费在线观看视频国产中文字幕亚洲 | 女性被躁到高潮视频| 国产日韩欧美在线精品| 亚洲九九香蕉| 免费在线观看日本一区| 久久亚洲国产成人精品v| 自拍欧美九色日韩亚洲蝌蚪91| 男人舔女人的私密视频| 日本色播在线视频| 久久久精品区二区三区| 亚洲av国产av综合av卡| 欧美精品啪啪一区二区三区 | 男的添女的下面高潮视频| 亚洲国产欧美网| www.999成人在线观看| 欧美日韩亚洲国产一区二区在线观看 | 精品人妻在线不人妻| 婷婷色综合大香蕉| 欧美日韩黄片免| 久久久久久久久久久久大奶| 国产片特级美女逼逼视频| 亚洲中文av在线| 久久人人爽av亚洲精品天堂| kizo精华| 搡老乐熟女国产| 美女中出高潮动态图| 国产成人91sexporn| 丝袜在线中文字幕| 后天国语完整版免费观看| 一级黄色大片毛片| 天天操日日干夜夜撸| 美国免费a级毛片| 亚洲中文av在线| 精品一区二区三区av网在线观看 | 日韩一区二区三区影片| 中国美女看黄片| 老司机亚洲免费影院| 久久国产精品大桥未久av| 久久99热这里只频精品6学生| 久久精品aⅴ一区二区三区四区| 成人国产av品久久久| 国产麻豆69| 天堂俺去俺来也www色官网| 亚洲一码二码三码区别大吗| av不卡在线播放| 欧美人与善性xxx| 亚洲欧洲国产日韩| 999精品在线视频| 免费观看人在逋| 欧美中文综合在线视频| 天天影视国产精品| 国产成人一区二区三区免费视频网站 | 黄片小视频在线播放| 熟女少妇亚洲综合色aaa.| 国产亚洲av片在线观看秒播厂| 国产国语露脸激情在线看| 超碰97精品在线观看| 视频在线观看一区二区三区| 97精品久久久久久久久久精品| 亚洲国产精品一区二区三区在线| 欧美乱码精品一区二区三区| 亚洲九九香蕉| 无限看片的www在线观看| 90打野战视频偷拍视频| 热re99久久国产66热| 黄色视频不卡| 久久99热这里只频精品6学生| 黄片小视频在线播放| 欧美少妇被猛烈插入视频| 美女午夜性视频免费| 亚洲精品乱久久久久久| 亚洲国产毛片av蜜桃av| 大码成人一级视频| 美女中出高潮动态图| 爱豆传媒免费全集在线观看| 十八禁高潮呻吟视频| 久久精品久久久久久噜噜老黄| 丝袜在线中文字幕| 操出白浆在线播放| 91字幕亚洲| 婷婷色综合大香蕉| 亚洲专区中文字幕在线| 精品一区二区三区四区五区乱码 | 在线观看免费日韩欧美大片| 性色av一级| 最新的欧美精品一区二区| 亚洲欧美一区二区三区国产| 亚洲av国产av综合av卡| 建设人人有责人人尽责人人享有的| 欧美精品人与动牲交sv欧美| 777久久人妻少妇嫩草av网站| 国产福利在线免费观看视频| 成年人午夜在线观看视频| 久久人妻福利社区极品人妻图片 | 亚洲国产欧美一区二区综合| 亚洲五月色婷婷综合| 一级,二级,三级黄色视频| 97人妻天天添夜夜摸| 人成视频在线观看免费观看| 国产精品久久久久久精品电影小说| 最近最新中文字幕大全免费视频 | 欧美日韩成人在线一区二区| 久久精品久久久久久久性| 亚洲五月婷婷丁香| 悠悠久久av| 国产精品一国产av| 国产欧美日韩一区二区三区在线| 久久久精品国产亚洲av高清涩受| 国产日韩欧美亚洲二区| 少妇的丰满在线观看| 国产深夜福利视频在线观看| 嫁个100分男人电影在线观看 | 性高湖久久久久久久久免费观看| 精品国产一区二区久久| www日本在线高清视频| 国产三级黄色录像| 国产男人的电影天堂91| 亚洲熟女毛片儿| 看十八女毛片水多多多| 激情五月婷婷亚洲| 人人妻,人人澡人人爽秒播 | 免费不卡黄色视频| 无限看片的www在线观看| 男女床上黄色一级片免费看| 精品久久蜜臀av无| 亚洲国产欧美日韩在线播放| cao死你这个sao货| 久久国产亚洲av麻豆专区| 美女午夜性视频免费| 日韩伦理黄色片| 久久久久国产精品人妻一区二区| 最近中文字幕2019免费版| 9色porny在线观看| 国产精品香港三级国产av潘金莲 | 黑人巨大精品欧美一区二区蜜桃| 亚洲精品自拍成人| 一区二区三区乱码不卡18| 亚洲第一青青草原| 高清av免费在线| 丁香六月天网| 啦啦啦在线观看免费高清www| 天天躁狠狠躁夜夜躁狠狠躁| 中文精品一卡2卡3卡4更新| 青春草视频在线免费观看| 国产成人啪精品午夜网站| 一区二区日韩欧美中文字幕| 欧美久久黑人一区二区| 亚洲国产日韩一区二区| 亚洲欧美一区二区三区久久| 最近最新中文字幕大全免费视频 | 99精国产麻豆久久婷婷| 人人澡人人妻人| 在线观看一区二区三区激情| 在线看a的网站| 国产99久久九九免费精品| 女人精品久久久久毛片| 一边摸一边做爽爽视频免费| 欧美激情高清一区二区三区| 免费在线观看日本一区| av视频免费观看在线观看| 最新在线观看一区二区三区 | 大香蕉久久网| 亚洲av电影在线观看一区二区三区| 欧美av亚洲av综合av国产av| 美女主播在线视频| 一级黄片播放器| 在线看a的网站| 丰满少妇做爰视频| 亚洲国产日韩一区二区| 欧美大码av| 日韩电影二区| 一本色道久久久久久精品综合| 中文字幕亚洲精品专区| 国产精品偷伦视频观看了| 午夜激情av网站| 肉色欧美久久久久久久蜜桃| 日日摸夜夜添夜夜爱| 人妻一区二区av| 国产精品三级大全| 人人妻人人爽人人添夜夜欢视频| 中文字幕高清在线视频| 满18在线观看网站| 亚洲欧美精品综合一区二区三区| 汤姆久久久久久久影院中文字幕| 中文字幕制服av| 老司机午夜十八禁免费视频| 国产xxxxx性猛交| 国产高清videossex| 久久精品国产亚洲av涩爱| 精品高清国产在线一区| 黄频高清免费视频| 亚洲欧美日韩另类电影网站| 天堂中文最新版在线下载| av在线播放精品| 中文字幕人妻丝袜一区二区| 亚洲精品国产色婷婷电影| 欧美在线黄色| 18禁裸乳无遮挡动漫免费视频| 人人妻,人人澡人人爽秒播 | 国语对白做爰xxxⅹ性视频网站| 国产欧美日韩精品亚洲av| 一本色道久久久久久精品综合| 天天躁夜夜躁狠狠躁躁| 波多野结衣一区麻豆| 婷婷色av中文字幕| 超色免费av| 一二三四在线观看免费中文在| 精品国产乱码久久久久久男人| 91精品伊人久久大香线蕉| 高清视频免费观看一区二区| 男女国产视频网站| h视频一区二区三区| 可以免费在线观看a视频的电影网站| www.自偷自拍.com| 婷婷色综合大香蕉| 狠狠精品人妻久久久久久综合| 美女主播在线视频| 久久精品久久久久久久性| 麻豆av在线久日| 中文乱码字字幕精品一区二区三区| 成在线人永久免费视频| 亚洲 欧美一区二区三区| 国产成人一区二区在线| 国产精品一区二区在线不卡| 久久亚洲精品不卡| 大片电影免费在线观看免费| 在线观看人妻少妇| 一区二区av电影网| 亚洲 国产 在线| 欧美人与性动交α欧美精品济南到| 一区二区三区激情视频| 免费高清在线观看视频在线观看| 一二三四在线观看免费中文在| 亚洲黑人精品在线| 亚洲欧美中文字幕日韩二区| 国产成人精品久久二区二区91| 热99国产精品久久久久久7| 一级毛片黄色毛片免费观看视频| 一本久久精品| 日韩大码丰满熟妇| 国产深夜福利视频在线观看| 男女边吃奶边做爰视频| 大香蕉久久网| 成年人午夜在线观看视频| 成人手机av| videos熟女内射| 男女高潮啪啪啪动态图| 久久久国产精品麻豆| 手机成人av网站| 国产熟女午夜一区二区三区| 日本欧美视频一区| xxxhd国产人妻xxx| 亚洲av日韩在线播放| 国产无遮挡羞羞视频在线观看| 色婷婷av一区二区三区视频| 国产不卡av网站在线观看| 丁香六月欧美| 欧美精品一区二区大全| 老汉色∧v一级毛片| 亚洲精品乱久久久久久| 人人妻人人爽人人添夜夜欢视频| 最近手机中文字幕大全| 大香蕉久久成人网| 精品亚洲成国产av| 成人影院久久| 美女脱内裤让男人舔精品视频| 一级a爱视频在线免费观看| 日本一区二区免费在线视频| 男女无遮挡免费网站观看| 看免费av毛片| cao死你这个sao货| 亚洲精品国产av蜜桃| 美女扒开内裤让男人捅视频| 美女高潮到喷水免费观看| 中文乱码字字幕精品一区二区三区| 波多野结衣一区麻豆| 国产在线观看jvid| 校园人妻丝袜中文字幕| 高清黄色对白视频在线免费看| 国产一级毛片在线| 大片电影免费在线观看免费| 欧美激情极品国产一区二区三区| a 毛片基地| 18禁黄网站禁片午夜丰满| 一区二区日韩欧美中文字幕| 丝袜美足系列| 国产成人影院久久av| 国产日韩欧美亚洲二区| 9色porny在线观看| 亚洲欧美一区二区三区黑人| 欧美日韩亚洲高清精品| 国产亚洲午夜精品一区二区久久| 成人亚洲精品一区在线观看| 亚洲欧美一区二区三区国产| 精品久久久久久电影网| 亚洲精品一二三| 国产在视频线精品| 如日韩欧美国产精品一区二区三区| 亚洲欧美色中文字幕在线| 一级毛片女人18水好多 | 国产日韩欧美视频二区| 桃花免费在线播放| 男女床上黄色一级片免费看| 老司机影院成人| 99香蕉大伊视频| 午夜免费观看性视频| 国产成人a∨麻豆精品| 亚洲精品自拍成人| 亚洲成人免费av在线播放| 青春草亚洲视频在线观看| 免费女性裸体啪啪无遮挡网站| 国产亚洲一区二区精品| 自拍欧美九色日韩亚洲蝌蚪91| 欧美激情极品国产一区二区三区| 亚洲精品一卡2卡三卡4卡5卡 | 亚洲av日韩在线播放| 欧美成人午夜精品| 久久精品久久久久久噜噜老黄| 精品人妻一区二区三区麻豆| xxx大片免费视频| 欧美变态另类bdsm刘玥| 看免费av毛片| 国产熟女欧美一区二区| 国产片特级美女逼逼视频| 18在线观看网站| 免费在线观看影片大全网站 | 99久久99久久久精品蜜桃| 国产免费福利视频在线观看| 水蜜桃什么品种好| 汤姆久久久久久久影院中文字幕| 每晚都被弄得嗷嗷叫到高潮| 久久久精品国产亚洲av高清涩受| 日本欧美视频一区| 欧美少妇被猛烈插入视频| 亚洲成av片中文字幕在线观看| 丝袜美足系列| 99国产精品一区二区蜜桃av | 99国产精品免费福利视频| 午夜日韩欧美国产| 51午夜福利影视在线观看| 国产精品久久久久久精品电影小说| 亚洲国产欧美一区二区综合| 亚洲欧美一区二区三区国产| 成人黄色视频免费在线看| 日本五十路高清| 日本猛色少妇xxxxx猛交久久| 深夜精品福利| 精品高清国产在线一区| 大型av网站在线播放| 国产亚洲一区二区精品| 国产一区二区在线观看av| 国产精品香港三级国产av潘金莲 | 亚洲久久久国产精品| 亚洲国产成人一精品久久久| 一本色道久久久久久精品综合| 热99久久久久精品小说推荐| 久久国产亚洲av麻豆专区|