American journal of clinical pathology · 2021
The Utility of Liver Biopsy in the Evaluation of Liver Disease and Abnormal Liver Function Tests.
СтатьяПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Khalifa Ali, Lewin David N, Sasso Roula, Rockey Don C
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: We aimed to assess the value of liver biopsy in the evaluation of abnormal liver tests.
METHODS: We analyzed consecutive liver biopsy specimens performed for evaluation of unexplained abnormal liver tests from 2014 to 2018. Diagnoses were categorized histologically and clinically. We determined whether histologic examination led to a specific diagnosis and whether prebiopsy laboratory variables predicted the underlying etiology.
RESULTS: Among the 383 liver biopsy specimens included, chronic hepatitis was the most common histologic (25%) and clinical (17%) diagnosis. Liver biopsy led to a clinical diagnosis in 87% of patients. The most likely clinical diagnoses were autoimmune hepatitis, nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, and drug-induced liver injury (38, 33, and 32 patients, respectively). Using sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values, we found that liver tests were not predictive of a specific diagnosis. In patients with no history of liver disease or clinical features of portal hypertension, biopsy specimens revealed histologic cirrhosis in 5% of patients.
CONCLUSIONS: Histopathologic diagnoses were made in 85% of patients undergoing liver biopsy for investigation of unexplained liver tests, leading to a clinical diagnosis in 87% of patients. However, neither liver tests themselves nor their patterns were useful in predicting histologic or clinical diagnoses.
METHODS: We analyzed consecutive liver biopsy specimens performed for evaluation of unexplained abnormal liver tests from 2014 to 2018. Diagnoses were categorized histologically and clinically. We determined whether histologic examination led to a specific diagnosis and whether prebiopsy laboratory variables predicted the underlying etiology.
RESULTS: Among the 383 liver biopsy specimens included, chronic hepatitis was the most common histologic (25%) and clinical (17%) diagnosis. Liver biopsy led to a clinical diagnosis in 87% of patients. The most likely clinical diagnoses were autoimmune hepatitis, nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, and drug-induced liver injury (38, 33, and 32 patients, respectively). Using sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values, we found that liver tests were not predictive of a specific diagnosis. In patients with no history of liver disease or clinical features of portal hypertension, biopsy specimens revealed histologic cirrhosis in 5% of patients.
CONCLUSIONS: Histopathologic diagnoses were made in 85% of patients undergoing liver biopsy for investigation of unexplained liver tests, leading to a clinical diagnosis in 87% of patients. However, neither liver tests themselves nor their patterns were useful in predicting histologic or clinical diagnoses.