16 research outputs found
Editorial: effect of hepatic steatosis on liver stiffness in patients with chronic hepatitis B
Interpretation of liver stiffness measurement-based approach for the monitoring of hepatitis B patients with antiviral therapy: A 2-year prospective study
Comparison of Elastography Point Quantification with Transient Elastography in Patients with Chronic Viral Hepatitis and Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease: A Pilot Study
Safety and efficacy of sofosbuvir-based direct-acting antiviral regimens for hepatitis C virus genotype 6 in Southwest China: Real-world experience of a retrospective study
Moderate to severe hepatic steatosis leads to overestimation of liver stiffness measurement in chronic hepatitis B patients without significant fibrosis
Assessment of serum Golgi protein 73 as a biomarker for the diagnosis of significant fibrosis in patients with chronic HBV infection
Evaluation and comparison of thirty noninvasive models for diagnosing liver fibrosis in chinese hepatitis B patients
The Clinical Value and Appropriateness Criteria of Upper Abdominal Magnetic Resonance Examinations in Patients Before and After Bariatric Surgery: a Study of 837 Images
Systematic review with meta-analysis: direct comparisons of biomarkers for the diagnosis of fibrosis in chronic hepatitis C and B
International audienceBackground : Blood tests and transient elastography (TE), proposed as alternatives to biopsy for identifying advanced fibrosis (METAVIR-stage-F2 or greater) or cirrhosis, have never been compared using an intention to diagnose approach, with direct comparisons only, and Bayesian approach.Aim : To permit more appropriate comparisons.Methods : From articles overview (2002–2014), we selected studies that directly compared the diagnostic accuracy of FibroTest, aspartate aminotransferase–platelet ratio index (APRI), FIB4 or TE, with biopsy as a reference, in patients with chronic hepatitis C (CHC) or B (CHB). Investigators abstracted and checked study details and quality by using pre-defined criteria. Bayesian method in intention to diagnose was the primary outcome.Results : Of 1321 articles identified, 71 studies including 77 groups according to aetiology (All-CB) were eligible: 37 Only-C, 28 Only-B and 12 Mixed-C-B. There were 185 direct comparisons between the area under the ROC curves (AUROCs), 99 for the diagnosis of advanced fibrosis and 86 for cirrhosis. In All-CB, Bayesian analyses revealed significant AUROCs differences in identifying advanced fibrosis in favour of FibroTest vs. TE [credibility interval: 0.06(0.02–0.09)], FibroTest vs. APRI [0.05 (0.03–0.07)] and for identifying cirrhosis TE vs. APRI [0.07 (0.02–0.13)] and FIB4 vs. APRI [0.04(0.02–0.05)]. No differences were observed between TE and FibroTest, for identifying cirrhosis in All-CB, and in sub-groups (Only-C, Only-B, Mixed-CB) for both cirrhosis and fibrosis.Conclusions : In CHC and CHB, APRI had lower performances than FIB-4, TE and FibroTest. TE had lower performance than FibroTest for identifying advanced fibrosis in All-CB, without significant difference for identifying cirrhosis in all groups