2021
DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v27.i7.641
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effect of liver inflammation on accuracy of FibroScan device in assessing liver fibrosis stage in patients with chronic hepatitis B virus infection

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
5

Citation Types

1
12
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 23 publications
(13 citation statements)
references
References 21 publications
1
12
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Relevant studies had shown that LSM could diagnose different stages of liver fibrosis in patients with CHB after 78 weeks of antiviral treatment, and the decrease of LSM absolute value could reflect the remission of liver inflammation [ 33 ]. The latest study found that Liver inflammation activity over 2 (OR = 3.53) was an independent risk factor for misdiagnosis of fibrosis stage using FibroScan, patients with liver inflammation activity ≥ 2 showed higher LSM values using FibroScan and higher rates of misdiagnosis of fibrosis stage, whereas the diagnostic performance of FibroScan for different fibrosis stages was significantly lower than that in patients with inflammation activity < 2 (all P < 0.05) [ 34 ]. It is expert opinion that each patient becomes his or her own control, using the stiffness delta changes over time to evaluate the efficacy of the treatment or the progression of disease—remembering that the measurement reflects stiffness and not fibrosis [ 35 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Relevant studies had shown that LSM could diagnose different stages of liver fibrosis in patients with CHB after 78 weeks of antiviral treatment, and the decrease of LSM absolute value could reflect the remission of liver inflammation [ 33 ]. The latest study found that Liver inflammation activity over 2 (OR = 3.53) was an independent risk factor for misdiagnosis of fibrosis stage using FibroScan, patients with liver inflammation activity ≥ 2 showed higher LSM values using FibroScan and higher rates of misdiagnosis of fibrosis stage, whereas the diagnostic performance of FibroScan for different fibrosis stages was significantly lower than that in patients with inflammation activity < 2 (all P < 0.05) [ 34 ]. It is expert opinion that each patient becomes his or her own control, using the stiffness delta changes over time to evaluate the efficacy of the treatment or the progression of disease—remembering that the measurement reflects stiffness and not fibrosis [ 35 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The absence of diagnostic DILI biomarkers has led to that serum AST/ALT, ALP, and TBL levels still remain the pillars for DILI case detection and qualification ( Andrade and Robles-Díaz, 2020 ). FibroScan is recommended as a non-invasive tool to assess fibrosis according to the European Association for the Study of the Liver guidelines and World Health Organization guidelines ( Huang et al, 2021b ). However, the accuracy of FibroScan in chronic DILI patients has been discussed rarely.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A pilot study clearly indicates that transient elastography cannot correctly classify all patients with persistent cirrhosis following 4 years of a patient with a sustained virological response (SVR) ( D'Ambrosio et al, 2013 ). All of the presence of inflammation and obesity or ascites can compromise the diagnostic accuracy of FibroScan ( Myers et al, 2012 ; Lupsor-Platon and Badea, 2015 ; Huang et al, 2021b ). Of course, there are several limitations in our study.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The distribution of the E values significantly changed from NAFL to NASH s0-1, NASH s2-3, and NASH s4 ( Figure 3-b ). These results indicated that the liver stiffness (E value) would be influenced not only by liver fibrosis but also by chronic inflammation (26) , (27) .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 82%