4.5 Article

Nutritional assessments for ordinary medical care in patients with chronic liver disease

Journal

HEPATOLOGY RESEARCH
Volume 43, Issue 2, Pages 192-199

Publisher

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/j.1872-034X.2012.01055.x

Keywords

anthropometry; controlling nutritional status; liver cirrhosis; malnutrition; mid-arm muscle circumference; prognostic nutritional index; triceps skinfold thickness

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Aim: In patients with chronic liver disease who are at risk of malnutrition, simple and useful assessments for nutritional status should be established for ordinary medical care. The prognostic nutritional index (PNI) and controlling nutritional status (CONUT) are simple assessments constructed of only two or three laboratory data. We aimed to describe the potential of PNI and CONUT as a nutritional assessment tool in patients with chronic liver disease. Methods: We enrolled 165 patients, aged 1885years, with chronic liver disease. These patients were nutritionally assessed by PNI or CONUT, demonstrating the association with the severity of chronic liver disease or anthropometric values. Results: The value of PNI or CONUT was significantly associated with the severity of chronic liver disease (P<0.001, respectively). In addition, the value of CONUT was significantly associated with all the anthropometric values such as body mass index (BMI, P<0.05), mid-arm circumference (AC, P<0.001), mid-arm muscle circumference (AMC, P<0.001), and triceps skinfold thickness (TSF, P<0.001), whereas the value of PNI was significantly associated with the values of AC (P<0.01), AMC (P<0.05) and TSF (P<0.05). Approximately 80% of cirrhotic patients were assessed by PNI or CONUT to have obvious malnutrition. Conclusion: PNI and CONUT are potential tools for nutritional assessment in patients with chronic liver disease, especially for ordinary medical care, because of their simplicity.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available