ArticlePakistan journal of medical sciences
Haemorrhagic versus non haemorrhagic ascites in cirrhosis: Their relationship and impact on prognosis of liver cirrhosis.
Article in Pakistan journal of medical sciences. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Shock From Hemorrhagic Ascites in a Non-cirrhotic Patient With Isolated High-Output Right Heart Failure.Cureus · 2025Article
- Hemorrhagic ascites as a complication of heart failure: A case report and review of the literature.Medicine · 2022Review
- Hemorrhagic Ascites Is Associated With Reduced Survival in Cirrhosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Gastroenterology research · 2022Article
- Clinical value of AEF in the post-processing technique of liver perfusion-like phase III enhanced CT scan in evaluating the degree of liver function impairment in patients with Hepatitis-B cirrhosis.Pakistan journal of medical sciencesArticle
- Serum procalcitonin, C-reactive protein, and neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin in early diagnosis of acute kidney injury after upper urinary tract calculi.Pakistan journal of medical sciencesArticle
- Analysis of risk factors and construction of predictive model for post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis.Pakistan journal of medical sciencesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate the impact of haemorrhagic ascites on prognosis of patients with advance cirrhosis, this study was further aimed to assess the relationship between haemorrhagic ascites and advance cirrhosis and its effect on prognosis.
methodsEight hundred and thirty-eight patients having liver cirrhosis with ascites were analyzed retrospectively (over three years) while segregated into two groups haemorrhagic and non haemorrhagic ascites. Patient outcome variables were identified among both groups and independent predictors for survival were analyzed. Kaplan-Meier survival estimates determined survival rate comparison between groups.
resultsHaemorrhagic ascites was detected in (26.6%) patients. Spontaneous haemorrhagic ascites(79%) was the main cause of haemorrhagic ascites followed by hepatocellular carcinoma (14%) and iatrogenic (7.6%). Spontaneous bacterial peritonitis and acute kidney injury were statistically significant (p= 0.0001, 0.0001) among groups. Overall mortality at year three was higher (83%) in haemorrhagic ascites group. Survival among both groups (haemorrhagic versus non haemorrhagic) at one month, one year and three year was found to be significant (p= 0.000, 0.000 and 0.000).
conclusionHaemorrhagic ascites impact overall survival with more mortality in comparison to non haemorrhagic ascites. Haemorrhagic ascites was an independent predictor of survival. Haemorrhagic ascites is possibly considered another predictor of survival among advance cirrhosis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.