The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The Serum-Ascites Albumin Gradient Is Superior to the Exudate-Transudate Concept in the Differential Diagnosis of Ascites
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the serum-ascites albumin gradient to the exudate-transudate concept in the classification of ascites. DESIGN: Prospective collection of ascitic fluid data from patients with well-characterized causes of ascites. SETTING: Hepatology inpatient and outpatient ward and consult service of a large, urban hospital. PATIENTS: A total of 901 paired serum and ascitic fluid samples were collected from consecutive patients with all forms of ascites. INTERVENTIONS: None. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The utility of the serum-ascites albumin gradient and the old exudate-transudate concept (as defined by ascitic fluid total protein concentration [AFTP]) were compared for their ability in discriminating the cause for ascites formation. RESULTS: The albumin gradient correctly differentiated causes of ascites due to portal hypertension from those that were not due to portal hypertension 96.7% of the time. The AFTP, when used as defined in the old exudate-transudate concept, classified the causes of ascites correctly only 55.6% of the time. This resulted in part because the AFTP of most spontaneously infected samples (traditionally expected to be exudates) was low, and the AFTP of most cardiac ascites samples (traditionally expected to be transudates) was high. CONCLUSIONS: The exudate-transudate concept should be discarded in the classification of ascites. The serum-ascites albumin gradient is far more useful than the AFTP as a marker for portal hypertension, but the latter remains a useful adjunct in the differential diagnosis of ascites.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Moore, K. P., Wong, F., Gines, P., Bernardi, M., Ochs, A., Salerno, F., Angeli, P., Porayko, M., Moreau, R., Garcia-Tsao, G., et al. (2003) · Hepatology · doi:10.1053/jhep.2003.50315 · Cited by 967
Management of Cirrhosis and Ascites
Ginès, P., Cárdenas, A., Arroyo, V., & Rodés, J. (2004) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmra035021 · Cited by 773
Guidelines on the management of ascites in cirrhosis
Aithal, G. P., Palaniyappan, N., China, L., Härmälä, S., Macken, L., Ryan, J. M., Wilkes, E. A., Moore, K., Leithead, J. A., Hayes, P. C., et al. (2021) · Gut · doi:10.1136/gutjnl-2020-321790 · Cited by 680
Review article: the diagnostic approach and current management of chylous ascites
Lizaola, B., Bonder, A., Trivedi, H. D., Tapper, E. B., & Cardenas, A. (2017) · Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics · doi:10.1111/apt.14284 · Cited by 163
Amino Acids, Peptides, and Proteins
Dietzen, D. J. (2018) · Principles and Applications of Molecular Diagnostics · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-816061-9.00013-8 · Cited by 82
Metadata
- Authors
- Runyon, B. A., Montano, A. A., Akriviadis, E. A., Antillon, M. R., Irving, M. A., & McHutchison, J. G.
- Venue
- Annals of Internal Medicine
- Publisher
- American College of Physicians
- Published
- 1992-08-01
- Volume
- 117
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 215-220
- ISSN
- 0003-4819 (ISSN-L)
- 1539-3704
- OpenAlex
- W2008657085
- Cited by
- 651
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 2.33
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Serum-Ascites Albumin Gradient Is Superior to the Exudate-Transudate Concept in the Differential Diagnosis of Ascites. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.7326/0003-4819-117-3-215
- The paper
- Runyon, B. A., Montano, A. A., Akriviadis, E. A., Antillon, M. R., Irving, M. A., & McHutchison, J. G. (1992). The Serum-Ascites Albumin Gradient Is Superior to the Exudate-Transudate Concept in the Differential Diagnosis of Ascites. Annals of Internal Medicine. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-117-3-215
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.