top of page

Understanding the Child-Pugh Score: A Vital Tool in Managing Chronic Liver Disease

Writer: MaytaMayta

Updated: Jun 15, 2024

The Child-Pugh score components, scoring system, and implications:

Parameter

1 Point

2 Points

3 Points

Total Bilirubin

< 2 mg/dL

2-3 mg/dL

> 3 mg/dL

Serum Albumin

> 3.5 g/dL

2.8-3.5 g/dL

< 2.8 g/dL

Prothrombin Time (INR)

< 4 sec prolongation (INR < 1.7)

4-6 sec prolongation (INR 1.7-2.3)

> 6 sec prolongation (INR > 2.3)

Ascites

None

Mild (diuretic-responsive)

Moderate to Severe (diuretic-refractory)

Hepatic Encephalopathy

None

Grade I-II (or suppressed with medication)

Grade III-IV (or refractory)

Child-Pugh Score Classification

Total Score

Class

Description

Clinical Implications

5-6

A

Mild liver disease

Good prognosis; symptom management and preventive care

7-9

B

Moderate liver disease

Moderate prognosis; requires closer monitoring and more intensive treatment

10-15

C

Severe liver disease

Poor prognosis; intensive management and evaluation for liver transplantation

Summary

  • Class A (5-6 points):

    • Mild liver disease

    • Good prognosis

    • Treatment: Symptom management and preventive care

  • Class B (7-9 points):

    • Moderate liver disease

    • Moderate prognosis

    • Treatment: Closer monitoring, more aggressive symptom and complication management, possible liver transplantation consideration

  • Class C (10-15 points):

    • Severe liver disease

    • Poor prognosis

    • Treatment: Intensive management, high priority for liver transplantation evaluation

This table serves as a quick reference guide for healthcare professionals to assess the Child-Pugh score, understand its implications, and make informed clinical decisions for managing patients with chronic liver disease.

Introduction

Chronic liver disease, particularly cirrhosis, is a significant health concern worldwide, requiring careful management and monitoring. One of the most crucial tools in a clinician's arsenal for assessing the prognosis and guiding treatment for these patients is the Child-Pugh score. This blog aims to provide an in-depth understanding of the Child-Pugh score, its components, and its clinical implications, enhancing the ability of medical professionals to utilize this tool effectively in practice.

Definition

The Child-Pugh scoring system (also known as the Child-Pugh-Turcotte score) was designed to predict mortality in cirrhosis patients. Originally conceptualized by Child and Turcotte in 1964, it aimed to guide the selection of patients who would benefit from elective surgery for portal decompression. The original scoring system used five clinical and laboratory criteria: serum bilirubin, serum albumin, ascites, neurological disorder, and clinical nutrition status. Later, Pugh et al. modified the system by replacing clinical nutrition status with prothrombin time and introducing variable points based on the severity of each criterion.

Child-Pugh Score Parameters

1. Albumin

  • Scoring:

    • 3.5 g/dL: 1 point

    • 2.8-3.5 g/dL: 2 points

    • <2.8 g/dL: 3 points

  • Diagnosis:

    • Lab Test: Serum albumin levels.

    • Interpretation: Lower levels indicate reduced liver synthetic function.

2. Bilirubin

  • Scoring:

    • <2 mg/dL: 1 point

    • 2-3 mg/dL: 2 points

    • 3 mg/dL: 3 points

  • Diagnosis:

    • Lab Test: Total bilirubin levels.

    • Interpretation: Elevated levels indicate impaired liver function and bile flow.

3. Coagulopathy (Prothrombin Time/INR)

  • Scoring:

    • PT <4 seconds prolonged or INR <1.7: 1 point

    • PT 4-6 seconds prolonged or INR 1.7-2.3: 2 points

    • PT >6 seconds prolonged or INR >2.3: 3 points

  • Diagnosis:

    • Lab Test: Prothrombin time (PT) and International Normalized Ratio (INR).

    • Interpretation: Prolonged PT or elevated INR indicates reduced clotting factor production.

4. Distension (Ascites)

  • Scoring:

    • None: 1 point

    • Mild (controlled medically): 2 points

    • Moderate to severe (refractory): 3 points

  • Diagnosis:

    • Physical Exam: Abdominal distension, shifting dullness, fluid wave test.

    • Imaging: Ultrasound or CT scan for confirmation.

5. Encephalopathy

  • Scoring:

    • None: 1 point

    • Grade I-II (or precipitant-induced): 2 points

    • Grade III-IV (or chronic): 3 points

  • Diagnosis:

    • Clinical Assessment: Mental status changes from mild confusion (Grade I) to coma (Grade IV).

  • Tests: Ammonia levels (though not always correlated with severity).

Child-Pugh Score Classification

  • Child-Pugh A (well-compensated disease): 5-6 points

    • Patients are generally considered safe for elective surgery (10% postoperative mortality).

  • Child-Pugh B (significant functional compromise): 7-9 points

    • Patients can proceed with surgery after medical optimization (30% postoperative mortality).

  • Child-Pugh C (decompensated disease): 10-15 points

    • Elective surgery is contraindicated (70-80% postoperative mortality).

Issues of Concern

The Child-Pugh classification has limitations:

  • Subjective Assessment: Grading ascites and encephalopathy can be subjective.

  • Lack of Renal Function: Does not account for renal function.

  • Limited Score Range: Only ten different scores, limiting differentiation based on disease severity.

To address these limitations, the MELD score was developed. It uses more continuous variables (bilirubin, creatinine, INR, serum sodium) for a broader and more precise assessment of liver disease severity.

Clinical Significance

The Child-Pugh score helps predict postoperative mortality and complications from liver dysfunction:

  • Child class A: 0% mortality at one year.

  • Child class B: 20% mortality at one year.

  • Child class C: 55% mortality at one year.

Practical Application

  • Class A: Regular follow-up, monitoring, and medical therapy.

  • Class B: Intensive monitoring and interventions like paracentesis for ascites.

  • Class C: Hospitalization and potential consideration for liver transplantation.

Example: A patient with:

  • Albumin of 3.2 g/dL (2 points)

  • Bilirubin of 2.5 mg/dL (2 points)

  • INR of 1.8 (2 points)

  • Mild ascites (2 points)

  • Grade I encephalopathy (2 points)

Total score = 2 + 2 + 2 + 2 + 2 = 10 (Child-Pugh C).

Interprofessional Team Interventions

Healthcare team members, especially those dealing with advanced liver disease, should be well-acquainted with the Child-Pugh score to guide patient care and improve outcomes through timely interventions.

Conclusion

The Child-Pugh score remains a valuable tool for assessing liver disease severity and guiding clinical decisions. Understanding its application, limitations, and comparison with other scoring systems like MELD is crucial for optimizing patient care and outcomes.

Recent Posts

See All

OSCE: Cervical Punch Biopsy

Introduction A cervical punch biopsy is a procedure used to obtain a small tissue sample from the cervix to investigate suspicious...

1 Comment

Rated 0 out of 5 stars.
No ratings yet

Add a rating
Mayta
Mayta
Jun 15, 2024

การใช้คะแนน Child-Pugh ในโรคตับ

การนิยาม/บทนำ ระบบการให้คะแนน Child-Pugh (หรือที่เรียกว่า Child-Pugh-Turcotte score) ถูกออกแบบมาเพื่อทำนายอัตราการเสียชีวิตในผู้ป่วยโรคตับแข็ง เดิมทีถูกพัฒนาโดย Child และ Turcotte ในปี 1964 เพื่อคัดเลือกผู้ป่วยที่จะได้รับประโยชน์จากการผ่าตัดลดความดันในเส้นเลือดพอร์ทัล ระบบการให้คะแนนนี้ใช้เกณฑ์ทางคลินิกและห้องปฏิบัติการ 5 อย่าง: serum bilirubin, serum albumin, ascites, neurological disorder, และ clinical nutrition status ระบบนี้ถูกปรับปรุงโดย Pugh et al. โดยเปลี่ยนจาก clinical nutrition status เป็น prothrombin time และเพิ่มคะแนนตามความรุนแรงของแต่ละเกณฑ์:

  • Encephalopathy: ไม่มี = 1 point, Grade 1 และ 2 = 2 points, Grade 3 และ 4 = 3 points

  • Ascites: ไม่มี = 1 point, เล็กน้อย = 2 points, ปานกลาง = 3 points

  • Bilirubin: น้อยกว่า 2 mg/dL = 1 point, 2 ถึง 3 mg/dL = 2 points, มากกว่า 3 mg/dL = 3 points

  • Albumin: มากกว่า 3.5 g/dL = 1 point, 2.8 ถึง 3.5 g/dL = 2 points, น้อยกว่า 2.8 g/dL = 3 points

  • Prothrombin Time (sec prolonged): น้อยกว่า…

Like
Post: Blog2_Post

Message for International Readers
Understanding My Medical Context in Thailand

By Uniqcret, M.D.
 

Dear readers,
 

My name is Uniqcret, which is my pen name used in all my medical writings. I am a Doctor of Medicine trained and currently practicing in Thailand, a developing country in Southeast Asia.
 

The medical training environment in Thailand is vastly different from that of Western countries. Our education system heavily emphasizes rote memorization—those who excel are often seen as "walking encyclopedias." Unfortunately, those who question, critically analyze, or solve problems efficiently may sometimes be overlooked, despite having exceptional clinical thinking skills.
 

One key difference is in patient access. In Thailand, patients can walk directly into tertiary care centers without going through a referral system or primary care gatekeeping. This creates an intense clinical workload for doctors and trainees alike. From the age of 20, I was already seeing real patients, performing procedures, and assisting in operations—not in simulations, but in live clinical situations. Long work hours, sometimes exceeding 48 hours without sleep, are considered normal for young doctors here.
 

Many of the insights I share are based on first-hand experiences, feedback from attending physicians, and real clinical practice. In our culture, teaching often involves intense feedback—what we call "โดนซอย" (being sliced). While this may seem harsh, it pushes us to grow stronger, think faster, and become more capable under pressure. You could say our motto is “no pain, no gain.”
 

Please be aware that while my articles may contain clinically accurate insights, they are not always suitable as direct references for academic papers, as some content is generated through AI support based on my knowledge and clinical exposure. If you wish to use the content for academic or clinical reference, I strongly recommend cross-verifying it with high-quality sources or databases. You may even copy sections of my articles into AI tools or search engines to find original sources for further reading.
 

I believe that my knowledge—built from real clinical experience in a high-intensity, under-resourced healthcare system—can offer valuable perspectives that are hard to find in textbooks. Whether you're a student, clinician, or educator, I hope my content adds insight and value to your journey.
 

With respect and solidarity,

Uniqcret, M.D.

Physician | Educator | Writer
Thailand

bottom of page