• <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

    嘟嘟电影网在线观看| 神马国产精品三级电影在线观看| 97超视频在线观看视频| 欧美zozozo另类| 亚洲人与动物交配视频| 午夜视频国产福利| 亚洲精品aⅴ在线观看| 日韩制服骚丝袜av| 少妇猛男粗大的猛烈进出视频 | 欧美 日韩 精品 国产| 久久这里有精品视频免费| 日本免费在线观看一区| 美女国产视频在线观看| 男女国产视频网站| 在线免费观看不下载黄p国产| 熟妇人妻不卡中文字幕| 夫妻性生交免费视频一级片| 99热网站在线观看| 99久久精品国产国产毛片| 丝瓜视频免费看黄片| 麻豆成人av视频| 男人舔奶头视频| 高清av免费在线| 日日摸夜夜添夜夜爱| 久久99热6这里只有精品| 国产日韩欧美在线精品| 十八禁网站网址无遮挡 | 成人亚洲精品av一区二区| 久久久久免费精品人妻一区二区| av播播在线观看一区| 国产亚洲最大av| 五月天丁香电影| 丝袜喷水一区| 国产免费一级a男人的天堂| 色吧在线观看| 97热精品久久久久久| 熟妇人妻不卡中文字幕| 亚洲欧美日韩东京热| 日本与韩国留学比较| 2018国产大陆天天弄谢| 午夜激情欧美在线| 国产午夜精品论理片| 亚洲av国产av综合av卡| 免费大片18禁| 国产精品蜜桃在线观看| 亚洲经典国产精华液单| 精品一区二区免费观看| 18禁裸乳无遮挡免费网站照片| 久久精品国产亚洲av天美| www.av在线官网国产| 少妇人妻一区二区三区视频| 一个人观看的视频www高清免费观看| 女的被弄到高潮叫床怎么办| 国产男女超爽视频在线观看| 亚洲精品色激情综合| 一区二区三区乱码不卡18| 日日啪夜夜爽| 天堂影院成人在线观看| 国内精品美女久久久久久| 在线免费观看的www视频| 国产精品久久视频播放| 国产精品麻豆人妻色哟哟久久 | 午夜激情福利司机影院| 久久久久免费精品人妻一区二区| 少妇丰满av| 欧美zozozo另类| 成年av动漫网址| 少妇高潮的动态图| 免费电影在线观看免费观看| 国产人妻一区二区三区在| 日韩电影二区| 欧美日韩在线观看h| 青青草视频在线视频观看| 免费在线观看成人毛片| 在线播放无遮挡| 国产av在哪里看| 舔av片在线| 三级国产精品片| 欧美+日韩+精品| 国产一区二区三区av在线| 超碰av人人做人人爽久久| 免费看av在线观看网站| 精品酒店卫生间| 又大又黄又爽视频免费| av卡一久久| 亚洲av在线观看美女高潮| 色综合色国产| 国产精品一及| 国产黄色视频一区二区在线观看| 中文字幕av在线有码专区| 亚洲精品亚洲一区二区| 国国产精品蜜臀av免费| 晚上一个人看的免费电影| 人妻制服诱惑在线中文字幕| 亚洲欧美成人综合另类久久久| 国产精品久久久久久av不卡| 免费黄网站久久成人精品| 国产成人精品福利久久| 又大又黄又爽视频免费| 国产精品熟女久久久久浪| 夜夜爽夜夜爽视频| 国产一区二区三区av在线| 一区二区三区四区激情视频| av线在线观看网站| 一区二区三区高清视频在线| 亚洲av一区综合| 嘟嘟电影网在线观看| 色综合色国产| 精品久久久久久久久av| 成人二区视频| 九九在线视频观看精品| av一本久久久久| 麻豆精品久久久久久蜜桃| 伦精品一区二区三区| 五月伊人婷婷丁香| 99久国产av精品国产电影| 日韩电影二区| 国产一区二区在线观看日韩| 中文乱码字字幕精品一区二区三区 | 日韩av不卡免费在线播放| 国产精品爽爽va在线观看网站| 欧美丝袜亚洲另类| 欧美人与善性xxx| 日韩中字成人| 一本一本综合久久| 久久久久久久久久成人| 一级毛片 在线播放| 久久久色成人| 伊人久久精品亚洲午夜| 日韩三级伦理在线观看| 久久99热6这里只有精品| 黄色配什么色好看| 国产男人的电影天堂91| 国产精品一二三区在线看| 国产探花极品一区二区| 日韩三级伦理在线观看| 国产一级毛片在线| 亚洲欧美精品自产自拍| 综合色丁香网| 国产一区有黄有色的免费视频 | 一本久久精品| 97超碰精品成人国产| 哪个播放器可以免费观看大片| 午夜福利在线观看吧| 亚洲三级黄色毛片| 国产亚洲5aaaaa淫片| 日韩av在线大香蕉| 美女被艹到高潮喷水动态| 国产亚洲5aaaaa淫片| 女人十人毛片免费观看3o分钟| 日日啪夜夜爽| 2021天堂中文幕一二区在线观| 一二三四中文在线观看免费高清| 亚洲丝袜综合中文字幕| 久久久久精品久久久久真实原创| 成人性生交大片免费视频hd| 国产成人精品福利久久| 高清av免费在线| 免费看av在线观看网站| 国产免费一级a男人的天堂| 最近视频中文字幕2019在线8| 如何舔出高潮| 91久久精品电影网| 综合色丁香网| 观看免费一级毛片| 国产一区二区三区av在线| 亚洲国产最新在线播放| 久久久久免费精品人妻一区二区| 久久久成人免费电影| 日韩亚洲欧美综合| 欧美激情久久久久久爽电影| 精品久久国产蜜桃| 又爽又黄无遮挡网站| 亚洲成人av在线免费| 2018国产大陆天天弄谢| 国产在线一区二区三区精| 国产免费一级a男人的天堂| 亚洲av一区综合| 天堂影院成人在线观看| 哪个播放器可以免费观看大片| 久久久久九九精品影院| 99re6热这里在线精品视频| 色综合亚洲欧美另类图片| 成人性生交大片免费视频hd| 久久久久久久久久人人人人人人| 99九九线精品视频在线观看视频| 国产精品麻豆人妻色哟哟久久 | 国产乱人偷精品视频| 精品一区二区三区人妻视频| 丝袜美腿在线中文| 欧美97在线视频| 91aial.com中文字幕在线观看| 最后的刺客免费高清国语| 日韩一区二区视频免费看| 少妇人妻一区二区三区视频| 国产美女午夜福利| 老司机影院毛片| 久久久久久国产a免费观看| 成人亚洲精品av一区二区| 永久免费av网站大全| 少妇裸体淫交视频免费看高清| 尤物成人国产欧美一区二区三区| 成人性生交大片免费视频hd| 特级一级黄色大片| 国国产精品蜜臀av免费| 真实男女啪啪啪动态图| 亚洲精品成人久久久久久| 禁无遮挡网站| 赤兔流量卡办理| 久久精品久久久久久噜噜老黄| av女优亚洲男人天堂| 国产亚洲精品av在线| 99久久中文字幕三级久久日本| 欧美xxxx黑人xx丫x性爽| 直男gayav资源| 身体一侧抽搐| 丰满乱子伦码专区| 午夜福利成人在线免费观看| 日产精品乱码卡一卡2卡三| 一区二区三区乱码不卡18| 亚洲无线观看免费| 国产国拍精品亚洲av在线观看| 久久草成人影院| 寂寞人妻少妇视频99o| 亚洲av一区综合| 亚洲在线观看片| 亚洲欧美日韩无卡精品| 水蜜桃什么品种好| 人体艺术视频欧美日本| 搡老妇女老女人老熟妇| 天堂av国产一区二区熟女人妻| 亚洲怡红院男人天堂| 51国产日韩欧美| 一个人看的www免费观看视频| 久久久久久久午夜电影| 又黄又爽又刺激的免费视频.| 亚洲乱码一区二区免费版| 美女cb高潮喷水在线观看| 国产伦理片在线播放av一区| 国产一区二区亚洲精品在线观看| 亚洲av成人精品一区久久| 国产真实伦视频高清在线观看| 禁无遮挡网站| 老司机影院毛片| 欧美一区二区亚洲| 日韩欧美一区视频在线观看 | 日韩电影二区| 一本—道久久a久久精品蜜桃钙片 精品乱码久久久久久99久播 | 丝瓜视频免费看黄片| 亚洲精品久久久久久婷婷小说| 国产在视频线精品| 亚洲av二区三区四区| av一本久久久久| 国产高清三级在线| 亚洲伊人久久精品综合| 久久草成人影院| 在线观看av片永久免费下载| 国产亚洲精品久久久com| 国产探花极品一区二区| 欧美性感艳星| 精品久久久久久久人妻蜜臀av| 婷婷六月久久综合丁香| 亚洲av电影不卡..在线观看| 免费看a级黄色片| 成年人午夜在线观看视频 | 偷拍熟女少妇极品色| 欧美97在线视频| 国产伦精品一区二区三区视频9| 午夜激情福利司机影院| 国内精品美女久久久久久| 午夜福利视频精品| 免费看光身美女| 有码 亚洲区| videos熟女内射| 久久国产乱子免费精品| 成人鲁丝片一二三区免费| 人妻夜夜爽99麻豆av| av国产久精品久网站免费入址| 色5月婷婷丁香| 精品久久国产蜜桃| 久久精品熟女亚洲av麻豆精品 | 女人被狂操c到高潮| 1000部很黄的大片| 男人和女人高潮做爰伦理| 国产精品1区2区在线观看.| 午夜亚洲福利在线播放| 亚洲国产日韩欧美精品在线观看| 夫妻午夜视频| 99久久精品一区二区三区| 日日撸夜夜添| 极品少妇高潮喷水抽搐| 亚洲精品乱码久久久久久按摩| 青春草亚洲视频在线观看| 99热这里只有是精品在线观看| 大又大粗又爽又黄少妇毛片口| h日本视频在线播放| 婷婷色综合大香蕉| 日日干狠狠操夜夜爽| 亚洲成人av在线免费| 亚洲av.av天堂| 中文乱码字字幕精品一区二区三区 | 亚洲精华国产精华液的使用体验| 日韩精品青青久久久久久| 一级毛片久久久久久久久女| 久久久久久久国产电影| 国产熟女欧美一区二区| 国产成人精品婷婷| 免费黄色在线免费观看| 三级经典国产精品| 18禁在线播放成人免费| av在线亚洲专区| 国产成人福利小说| 日韩电影二区| 一级a做视频免费观看| 乱码一卡2卡4卡精品| 久久精品国产自在天天线| 成人鲁丝片一二三区免费| 日韩精品青青久久久久久| 国产片特级美女逼逼视频| 在线a可以看的网站| 日韩av在线大香蕉| 亚洲色图av天堂| 久久精品久久精品一区二区三区| 亚洲最大成人中文| 一区二区三区四区激情视频| 国产成人精品福利久久| 少妇猛男粗大的猛烈进出视频 | 少妇丰满av| 女人被狂操c到高潮| 亚洲激情五月婷婷啪啪| 51国产日韩欧美| 91久久精品电影网| 亚洲欧美一区二区三区国产| 亚洲精品日韩在线中文字幕| 午夜激情福利司机影院| av在线观看视频网站免费| 能在线免费观看的黄片| 久久精品人妻少妇| 久久精品夜色国产| 午夜福利在线在线| 久久精品国产亚洲网站| 亚洲av中文av极速乱| 日韩亚洲欧美综合| ponron亚洲| 国产精品一区www在线观看| 成年女人看的毛片在线观看| 插阴视频在线观看视频| 国产有黄有色有爽视频| 最近手机中文字幕大全| 国产精品一区二区性色av| 久久久久九九精品影院| 国产一级毛片七仙女欲春2| 婷婷色综合www| 在线天堂最新版资源| 性色avwww在线观看| 色网站视频免费| 欧美成人一区二区免费高清观看| 夜夜看夜夜爽夜夜摸| 18禁裸乳无遮挡免费网站照片| 老司机影院毛片| 国产精品久久视频播放| 国产高清不卡午夜福利| 高清欧美精品videossex| 久久久久久久久久人人人人人人| 男插女下体视频免费在线播放| 在线免费观看的www视频| 成年免费大片在线观看| 亚洲欧美日韩无卡精品| 狠狠精品人妻久久久久久综合| 国产不卡一卡二| 久热久热在线精品观看| 亚洲欧美成人综合另类久久久| 免费黄网站久久成人精品| 久久久久精品久久久久真实原创| 精品亚洲乱码少妇综合久久| 国产精品一及| 国产一区有黄有色的免费视频 | 欧美成人午夜免费资源| 99热网站在线观看| 国产日韩欧美在线精品| 亚洲欧洲日产国产| 尾随美女入室| 一级毛片久久久久久久久女| 精品酒店卫生间| 国产成人a∨麻豆精品| 一个人看的www免费观看视频| 六月丁香七月| 亚洲国产高清在线一区二区三| 亚洲最大成人手机在线| 两个人的视频大全免费| 亚洲欧美一区二区三区国产| 亚洲乱码一区二区免费版| 男人狂女人下面高潮的视频| 成人国产麻豆网| 色尼玛亚洲综合影院| 久久久久久久久大av| av在线老鸭窝| 国产一区二区亚洲精品在线观看| 中文资源天堂在线| 一夜夜www| 色综合色国产| 男插女下体视频免费在线播放| 永久网站在线| 久99久视频精品免费| 亚洲av国产av综合av卡| 久热久热在线精品观看| www.色视频.com| av黄色大香蕉| 高清av免费在线| 波多野结衣巨乳人妻| 乱人视频在线观看| 久久精品国产亚洲av涩爱| 国产黄片视频在线免费观看| 网址你懂的国产日韩在线| 欧美成人a在线观看| 免费av不卡在线播放| 午夜老司机福利剧场| 全区人妻精品视频| 亚洲成人久久爱视频| 国产亚洲5aaaaa淫片| 亚洲精品456在线播放app| 男女下面进入的视频免费午夜| 伊人久久国产一区二区| 久久久国产一区二区| 欧美变态另类bdsm刘玥| 久久综合国产亚洲精品| 亚洲经典国产精华液单| 日韩亚洲欧美综合| 国产亚洲5aaaaa淫片| 极品教师在线视频| 99久久中文字幕三级久久日本| 夜夜爽夜夜爽视频| 听说在线观看完整版免费高清| 亚洲欧美日韩东京热| 精品久久久久久久末码| 午夜福利网站1000一区二区三区| 建设人人有责人人尽责人人享有的 | 蜜桃久久精品国产亚洲av| 亚洲av.av天堂| 欧美97在线视频| 综合色av麻豆| 大香蕉久久网| 日本欧美国产在线视频| 国产黄色免费在线视频| 久久久久久久国产电影| 国产一区亚洲一区在线观看| kizo精华| 一个人观看的视频www高清免费观看| 精品国产露脸久久av麻豆 | 亚洲成色77777| 毛片女人毛片| 免费高清在线观看视频在线观看| 中文字幕免费在线视频6| www.色视频.com| 亚洲三级黄色毛片| 亚洲18禁久久av| 99久国产av精品| 免费看a级黄色片| 久久精品国产亚洲网站| 国产午夜福利久久久久久| 精品国内亚洲2022精品成人| 精品久久久久久久久亚洲| 乱系列少妇在线播放| 一区二区三区高清视频在线| 亚洲一区高清亚洲精品| 男女下面进入的视频免费午夜| 国产在视频线在精品| 国产黄a三级三级三级人| 看黄色毛片网站| 观看美女的网站| 亚洲av二区三区四区| 五月天丁香电影| 自拍偷自拍亚洲精品老妇| 蜜桃久久精品国产亚洲av| 国产精品一区二区三区四区久久| kizo精华| 美女内射精品一级片tv| 国产免费一级a男人的天堂| 国产精品一二三区在线看| 黄片wwwwww| 日本一本二区三区精品| av在线天堂中文字幕| 一个人看的www免费观看视频| 精品欧美国产一区二区三| freevideosex欧美| 别揉我奶头 嗯啊视频| 久久久国产一区二区| 伦精品一区二区三区| 成人无遮挡网站| 纵有疾风起免费观看全集完整版 | av在线蜜桃| 久久精品国产亚洲网站| 久久99热这里只有精品18| 国产探花在线观看一区二区| 亚洲精品久久午夜乱码| 欧美xxⅹ黑人| 又爽又黄无遮挡网站| 国产精品一及| 亚洲国产日韩欧美精品在线观看| 一区二区三区免费毛片| 亚洲精品视频女| 欧美高清性xxxxhd video| 精品午夜福利在线看| 波多野结衣巨乳人妻| 淫秽高清视频在线观看| kizo精华| 国产黄片视频在线免费观看| 十八禁网站网址无遮挡 | 亚洲精品中文字幕在线视频 | 91午夜精品亚洲一区二区三区| 好男人在线观看高清免费视频| 国产精品久久久久久久电影| 国语对白做爰xxxⅹ性视频网站| 黄色日韩在线| 六月丁香七月| 国产老妇女一区| 日韩欧美精品免费久久| 夫妻性生交免费视频一级片| 欧美xxxx黑人xx丫x性爽| 国产精品1区2区在线观看.| 国产精品久久视频播放| 美女脱内裤让男人舔精品视频| 一本久久精品| 日本黄大片高清| 久久久久网色| 国产精品一区二区性色av| 能在线免费观看的黄片| 久久精品夜夜夜夜夜久久蜜豆| 成年女人在线观看亚洲视频 | 熟妇人妻不卡中文字幕| 国产精品日韩av在线免费观看| 免费大片黄手机在线观看| 国产片特级美女逼逼视频| 美女主播在线视频| 国产色婷婷99| 69人妻影院| 两个人的视频大全免费| 国产91av在线免费观看| 欧美另类一区| 国产高清不卡午夜福利| 99久久精品国产国产毛片| av.在线天堂| 国产淫片久久久久久久久| 久久精品人妻少妇| 国产69精品久久久久777片| 日本与韩国留学比较| 国产精品久久久久久久久免| 美女主播在线视频| 三级国产精品片| 五月伊人婷婷丁香| 国产亚洲一区二区精品| 国产淫语在线视频| 欧美性感艳星| 午夜福利在线观看免费完整高清在| a级毛色黄片| 日韩大片免费观看网站| 日日摸夜夜添夜夜添av毛片| 日本一二三区视频观看| 日本色播在线视频| 日韩电影二区| 性插视频无遮挡在线免费观看| 在线观看av片永久免费下载| av线在线观看网站| 成人漫画全彩无遮挡| 熟女电影av网| 欧美丝袜亚洲另类| 黑人高潮一二区| 亚洲最大成人中文| 精品人妻熟女av久视频| 亚洲伊人久久精品综合| 国产午夜精品论理片| 久久久色成人| 久久精品夜夜夜夜夜久久蜜豆| 亚洲人成网站在线观看播放| 一级毛片我不卡| 只有这里有精品99| 国产色爽女视频免费观看| 在线观看美女被高潮喷水网站| 国产精品一区二区性色av| 精品久久久久久成人av| 久久久久久久午夜电影| 国产av码专区亚洲av| 一级av片app| 亚洲av福利一区| 成年版毛片免费区| 日韩一区二区三区影片| av又黄又爽大尺度在线免费看| 精品酒店卫生间| 99热全是精品| 精品午夜福利在线看| 女人久久www免费人成看片| 久久人人爽人人片av| 日韩三级伦理在线观看| www.av在线官网国产| 国产中年淑女户外野战色| 亚洲精品乱久久久久久| 国产精品一区二区三区四区免费观看| 国产精品一区www在线观看| 热99在线观看视频| 尾随美女入室| 男人和女人高潮做爰伦理| 免费播放大片免费观看视频在线观看| 日韩在线高清观看一区二区三区| 日本欧美国产在线视频| 热99在线观看视频| 国产午夜精品论理片| 在线免费十八禁| 久久久久久久久大av| 亚洲最大成人中文| 亚洲精品成人av观看孕妇| 国产 亚洲一区二区三区 | 国产午夜精品一二区理论片| 99久久精品国产国产毛片| 国内揄拍国产精品人妻在线| 国产精品人妻久久久久久|