ArticleTherapeutics and clinical risk management2025
Comparative Cost-Effectiveness of Two Artificial Liver Therapies in Early-Stage Hepatitis B Virus-Related Acute-on-Chronic Liver Failure: A Retrospective Cohort Study.
Article in Therapeutics and clinical risk management, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Low-Volume Plasma Exchange Combined With a Double Plasma Molecular Adsorption System is Superior to Standard-Volume Plasma Exchange in improving the MELD Score and Reducing Plasma Consumption in Adult Patients With Acute Liver Failure: A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study From Heilongjiang Province.Canadian journal of gastroenterology & hepatology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This study aimed to compare the cost-effectiveness of the double plasma molecular adsorption system sequential low-volume plasma exchange (DPMAS+LPE) versus conventional plasma exchange (PE) in treating early-stage hepatitis B virus-related acute-on-chronic liver failure (HBV-ACLF). Patients and Methods: A total of 215 early-stage HBV-ACLF patients were assigned to either DPMAS+LPE or conventional PE groups. After propensity score matching (1:1), 101 matched pairs were analyzed. We compared 30- and 90-day survival rates and direct medical costs from the healthcare payer's perspective. Cost-effectiveness analysis was performed with a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $12,681 and $38,043, equivalent to 1 and 3 times China's 2023 per capita GDP. Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (Bootstrap method) were used to assess parameter uncertainty. Results: Over the 90-day follow-up period, the DPMAS+LPE group had numerically higher survival rates compared to the PE group, but this difference was not statistically significant (91.04% vs 83.07%, Logrank: Conclusion: Compared to PE, DPMAS+LPE demonstrated cost-effectiveness at 90 days in early-stage HBV-ACLF patients, particularly those with cirrhosis. While DPMAS+LPE can be considered a suitable artificial liver therapy option for early-stage HBV-ACLF, careful consideration must be given to the number of treatments to ensure cost-effectiveness.
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.