ArticleAnnals of intensive care2026
Are King's College and Clichy-Villejuif criteria used for liver transplantation still appropriate? A retrospective study over a 25-year period.
Article in Annals of intensive care, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Acute liver injury (ALI) is a life-threatening condition that may require liver transplantation (LT). For over three decades, the King's College Hospital (KCH) and Clichy-Villejuif (CV) criteria have guided LT decisions, but their relevance in the modern intensive care unit (ICU) era remains uncertain. This study aimed to assess the "real-life" incidence of LT among ICU patients with ALI fulfilling these criteria. We retrospectively analysed prospectively collected data from 2000 to 2025 in a tertiary ICU with an active LT program. All consecutive adult patients with ALI fulfilling KCH and/or CV criteria without contraindications were included. The primary endpoint was the incidence of LT. Secondary endpoints included ICU and one-year survival, organ support requirements, temporal trends and transplant-free survival according to criteria fulfilment. Results: Among 396 patients with ALI, 118 fulfilled KCH and/or CV criteria without contraindications for LT. The incidence of LT was 34% (40 out of 118). ICU and one-year survival did not significantly differ between transplanted and not transplanted patients (88% vs. 92% and 85% vs. 81%, respectively). Transplanted patients had more severe liver dysfunction, reflected by higher MELD scores driven by higher values of bilirubin and INR. They were more likely to have auto-immune hepatitis (23% vs. 1%, p < 0.01), and less likely to have acetaminophen-induced (25% vs. 46%, p = 0.03) or ischaemic ALI (2% vs. 26%, p < 0.01). Encephalopathy progression was more frequent in transplanted patients. The delay between ICU admission and LT significantly increased over the study period. Among not transplanted patients, one-year transplant-free survival exceeded 80% overall and remained high across all KCH/CV fulfilment patterns. Conclusion: In our cohort, only one-third of ALI patients fulfilling emergency LT criteria underwent transplantation. These findings suggest that historical KCH and CV criteria have limited ability to identify patients with poor prognosis without LT in the context of modern intensive care.
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.