46 research outputs found

    The diagnostic value of liver biopsy

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Since the introduction of molecular diagnostic tools such as markers for hepatitis C and different autoimmune diseases, liver biopsy is thought to be useful mainly for staging but not for diagnostic purposes. The aim was to review the liver biopsies for 5 years after introduction of testing for hepatitis C, in order to evaluate what diagnostic insights – if any – remain after serologic testing. METHODS: Retrospective review of all liver biopsies performed between 1.1.1995 and 31.12.1999 at an academic outpatient hepatology department. The diagnoses suspected in the biopsy note were compared with the final diagnosis arrived at during a joint meeting with the responsible clinicians and a hepatopathologist. RESULTS: In 365 patients, 411 diagnoses were carried out before biopsy. 84.4 % were confirmed by biopsy but in 8.8 %, 6.8 % and 10.5 % the diagnosis was specified, changed or a diagnosis added, respectively. Additional diagnoses of clinical relevance were unrecognized biliary obstruction and additional alcoholic liver disease in patients with chronic hepatitis C. Liver biopsy led to change in management for 12.1 % of patients. CONCLUSION: Even in the era of advanced virological, immunological and molecular genetic testing, liver biopsy remains a useful diagnostic tool. The yield is particularly high in marker negative patients but also in patients with a clear-cut prebiopsy diagnosis, liver biopsy can lead to changes in patient management

    Drug treatment program patients' hepatitis C virus (HCV) education needs and their use of available HCV education services

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: In spite of the disproportionate prevalence of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection among drug users, many remain uninformed or misinformed about the virus. Drug treatment programs are important sites of opportunity for providing HCV education to their patients, and many programs do, in fact, offer this education in a variety of formats. Little is known, however, about the level of HCV knowledge among drug treatment program patients, and the extent to which they utilize their programs' HCV education services. METHODS: Using data collected from patients (N = 280) in 14 U.S. drug treatment programs, we compared patients who reported that they never injected drugs (NIDUs) with past or current drug injectors (IDUs) concerning their knowledge about HCV, whether they used HCV education opportunities at their programs, and the facilitators and barriers to doing so. All of the programs were participating in a research project that was developing, implementing, and evaluating a staff training to provide HCV support to patients. RESULTS: Although IDUs scored higher on an HCV knowledge assessment than NIDUs, there were many gaps in HCV knowledge among both groups of patients. To address these knowledge gaps, all of the programs offered at least one form of HCV education: all offered 1:1 sessions with staff, 12 of the programs offered HCV education in a group format, and 11 of the programs offered this education through pamphlets/books. Only 60% of all of the participating patients used any of their programs' HCV education services, but those who did avail themselves of these HCV education opportunities generally assessed them positively. In all, many patients were unaware that HCV education was offered at their programs through individual sessions with staff, group meetings, and books/pamphlets, (42%, 49%, and 46% of the patients, respectively), and 22% were unaware that any HCV education opportunities existed. CONCLUSION: Efforts especially need to focus on ensuring that all drug treatment program patients are made aware of and encouraged to use HCV education services at their programs

    Response to interferon alfa is hepatitis B virus genotype dependent: genotype A is more sensitive to interferon than genotype D

    No full text
    Background an aims: Current interferon alfa (IFN) treatment of chronic hepatitis B has limited efficacy. The role of hepatitis B virus (HBV) genotypes for response to IFN was investigated. Patients and methods: HBV genotype was determined by direct sequencing of the HBV X gene in 165 consecutive patients with chronic replicative hepatitis B treated with standard IFN. HBV genotype A or D was found in 144 cases. Results: Sustained response (six months after treatment) to standard IFN therapy was higher in HBV genotype A compared with HBV genotype D infected patients (49% v 26%; p<0.005). Sustained response to IFN was 46% versus 24% (p<0.03) in hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg) positive hepatitis (n = 99) and 59% versus 29% (p<0.05) in HBeAg negative hepatitis (n = 45) for HBV genotype A compared with HBV genotype D. HBeAg status had no negative impact on IFN response. Multivariate logistic regression identified HBV genotype A and high pretreatment alanine aminotransferase levels (>2×upper limit of normal) as independent positive predictive parameters of IFN response. Conclusions: The present study indicates that HBV genotypes A and D are important and independent predictors of IFN responsiveness in chronic hepatitis B. HBV genotype adapted treatment regimens may further improve treatment efficacy in chronic hepatitis B
    corecore