Clinical and experimental hepatology · 2020
FIB-5 versus FIB-4 index for assessment of hepatic fibrosis in chronic hepatitis B affected patients.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Metwally Khaled, Elsabaawy Maha, Abdel-Samiee Mohamed, Morad Wessam, Ehsan Nermine, Abdelsameea Eman
Аннотация
AIM OF THE STUDY: Chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection is one of the major health problems worldwide. Use of non-invasive tests for assessment of hepatic fibrosis such as the FIB-4 index could be used to avoid liver biopsy. Another promising noninvasive test, FIB-5, could also be used to detect significant hepatic fibrosis. The aim of the study was to compare the use of FIB-5 and FIB-4 as noninvasive markers to assess chronic HBV-related hepatic fibrosis.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: This study was done on 176 chronic HBV patients who underwent liver biopsy. Grading and staging of liver fibrosis was done according to the METAVIR scoring system. FIB-5 and FIB-4 scores were calculated for all patients.
RESULTS: As regards FIB-4 for differentiation between non-significant fibrosis (group I) and significant fibrosis (group II), at a cutoff level of 1.28 with positive predictive value (PPV) 41.4% and specificity 48% while at a cutoff level of 7.08 with PPV 98.8% and specificity 98% for FIB-5.
CONCLUSIONS: As regards both scores, the FIB-5 score was more specific than FIB-4 for diagnosing significant from nonsignificant hepatic fibrosis in patients with chronic HBV infection.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: This study was done on 176 chronic HBV patients who underwent liver biopsy. Grading and staging of liver fibrosis was done according to the METAVIR scoring system. FIB-5 and FIB-4 scores were calculated for all patients.
RESULTS: As regards FIB-4 for differentiation between non-significant fibrosis (group I) and significant fibrosis (group II), at a cutoff level of 1.28 with positive predictive value (PPV) 41.4% and specificity 48% while at a cutoff level of 7.08 with PPV 98.8% and specificity 98% for FIB-5.
CONCLUSIONS: As regards both scores, the FIB-5 score was more specific than FIB-4 for diagnosing significant from nonsignificant hepatic fibrosis in patients with chronic HBV infection.