Clinics and research in hepatology and gastroenterology · 2023
Hyperferritinemia and liver iron content determined with MRI: Reintroduction of the liver iron index.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Moris Wenke, Verbeek Jef, Bakers Frans C, Rombout-Sestrienkova Eva, Innocenti Francesco, Masclee Ad A M, Koek Ger H, van Deursen Cees Th B M
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Hyperferritinemia is found in around 12 % of the general population. Analyzing the cause can be difficult. In case of doubt about the presence of major iron overload most guidelines advice to perform a MRI as a reliable non-invasive marker to measure liver iron concentration (LIC). In general, a LIC of ≥ 36 µmol/g dw is considered the be elevated however in hyperferritinemia associated with, for example, obesity or alcohol (over)consumption the LIC can be ≥ 36 µmol/g dw in abscence of major iron overload. So, unfortunately a clear cut-off value to differentiate iron overload from normal iron content is lacking. Previously the liver iron index (LII) (LIC measured in liver biopsy (LIC-b)/age (years)), was introduced to differentiate between patients with major (LII ≥ 2) and minor or no iron overload (LII < 2). Based on the good correlation between the LIC-b and LIC determined with MRI (LIC-MRI), our goal was to investigate whether a LII_MRI ≥ 2 is a good indicator of major iron overload, reflected by a significantly higher amount of iron needed to be mobilized to reach iron depletion.
METHODS: We compared the amount of mobilized iron to reach depletion and inflammation-related characteristics in two groups: LII-MRI ≥ 2 versus LII-MRI <2 in 92 hyperferritinemia patients who underwent HFE genotyping and MRI-LIC determination.
RESULTS: Significantly more iron needed to be mobilized to reach iron depletion in the LII ≥ 2 group (mean 4741, SD ± 4135 mg) versus the LII-MRI <2 group (mean 1340, SD ± 533 mg), P < 0.001. Furthermore, hyperferritinemia in LII-MRI < 2 patients was more often related to components of the metabolic syndrome while hyperferritinemia in LII-MRI ≥ 2 patients was more often related to HFE mutations. ROC curve analysis showed good performance of LII =2 as cut-off value. However the calculations showed that the optimal cut-off for the LII = 3.4.
CONCLUSION: The LII-MRI with a cut-off value of 2 is an effective method to differentiate major from minor iron overload in patients with hyperferritinemia. But the LII-MRI = 3.4 seems a more promising diagnostic test for major iron overload.
METHODS: We compared the amount of mobilized iron to reach depletion and inflammation-related characteristics in two groups: LII-MRI ≥ 2 versus LII-MRI <2 in 92 hyperferritinemia patients who underwent HFE genotyping and MRI-LIC determination.
RESULTS: Significantly more iron needed to be mobilized to reach iron depletion in the LII ≥ 2 group (mean 4741, SD ± 4135 mg) versus the LII-MRI <2 group (mean 1340, SD ± 533 mg), P < 0.001. Furthermore, hyperferritinemia in LII-MRI < 2 patients was more often related to components of the metabolic syndrome while hyperferritinemia in LII-MRI ≥ 2 patients was more often related to HFE mutations. ROC curve analysis showed good performance of LII =2 as cut-off value. However the calculations showed that the optimal cut-off for the LII = 3.4.
CONCLUSION: The LII-MRI with a cut-off value of 2 is an effective method to differentiate major from minor iron overload in patients with hyperferritinemia. But the LII-MRI = 3.4 seems a more promising diagnostic test for major iron overload.