Literature DB >> 15940625

Sampling variability of liver biopsy in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease.

Vlad Ratziu1, Frédéric Charlotte, Agnès Heurtier, Sophie Gombert, Philippe Giral, Eric Bruckert, André Grimaldi, Frédérique Capron, Thierry Poynard.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND & AIMS: In nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), the distinction between steatosis and steatohepatitis (NASH) and the assessment of the severity of the disease rely on liver histology alone. The aim of this study was to assess the sampling error of liver biopsy and its impact on the diagnosis and staging of NASH.
METHODS: Fifty-one patients with NAFLD underwent percutaneous liver biopsy with 2 samples collected. The agreement between paired biopsy specimens was assessed by the percentage of discordant results and by the kappa reliability test.
RESULTS: No features displayed high agreement; substantial agreement was only seen for steatosis grade; moderate agreement for hepatocyte ballooning and perisinusoidal fibrosis; fair agreement for Mallory bodies; acidophilic bodies and lobular inflammation displayed only slight agreement. Overall, the discordance rate for the presence of hepatocyte ballooning was 18%, and ballooning would have been missed in 24% of patients had only 1 biopsy been performed. The negative predictive value of a single biopsy for the diagnosis of NASH was at best 0.74. Discordance of 1 stage or more was 41%. Six of 17 patients with bridging fibrosis (35%) on 1 sample had only mild or no fibrosis on the other and therefore could have been under staged with only 1 biopsy. Intraobserver variability was systematically lower than sampling variability and therefore could not account for most of the sampling error.
CONCLUSIONS: Histologic lesions of NASH are unevenly distributed throughout the liver parenchyma; therefore, sampling error of liver biopsy can result in substantial misdiagnosis and staging inaccuracies.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15940625     DOI: 10.1053/j.gastro.2005.03.084

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gastroenterology        ISSN: 0016-5085            Impact factor:   22.682


  581 in total

1.  Digital quantification is more precise than traditional semiquantitation of hepatic steatosis: correlation with fibrosis in 220 treatment-naïve patients with chronic hepatitis C.

Authors:  Sekou R Rawlins; Ola El-Zammar; J Michael Zinkievich; Nancy Newman; Robert A Levine
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2010-05-12       Impact factor: 3.199

2.  Noninvasive Biomarkers of Liver Fibrosis: Clinical Applications and Future Directions.

Authors:  Daniel L Motola; Peter Caravan; Raymond T Chung; Bryan C Fuchs
Journal:  Curr Pathobiol Rep       Date:  2014-12-01

3.  A biomarker panel for non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) and NASH-related fibrosis.

Authors:  Zobair M Younossi; Sandra Page; Nila Rafiq; Aybike Birerdinc; Maria Stepanova; Noreen Hossain; Arian Afendy; Zahra Younoszai; Zachary Goodman; Ancha Baranova
Journal:  Obes Surg       Date:  2011-04       Impact factor: 4.129

4.  The utility of Xenon-133 liver scan in the diagnosis and management of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease.

Authors:  Said A Al-Busafi; Peter Ghali; Philip Wong; Javier A Novales-Diaz; Marc Deschênes
Journal:  Can J Gastroenterol       Date:  2012-03       Impact factor: 3.522

Review 5.  Insulin regulation of gluconeogenesis.

Authors:  Maximilian Hatting; Clint D J Tavares; Kfir Sharabi; Amy K Rines; Pere Puigserver
Journal:  Ann N Y Acad Sci       Date:  2017-09-03       Impact factor: 5.691

6.  Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: MR imaging of liver proton density fat fraction to assess hepatic steatosis.

Authors:  An Tang; Justin Tan; Mark Sun; Gavin Hamilton; Mark Bydder; Tanya Wolfson; Anthony C Gamst; Michael Middleton; Elizabeth M Brunt; Rohit Loomba; Joel E Lavine; Jeffrey B Schwimmer; Claude B Sirlin
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2013-02-04       Impact factor: 11.105

7.  Comparison of diagnostic accuracies of two- and three-dimensional MR elastography of the liver.

Authors:  Hiroyuki Morisaka; Utaroh Motosugi; Kevin J Glaser; Shintaro Ichikawa; Richard L Ehman; Katsuhiro Sano; Tomoaki Ichikawa; Hiroshi Onishi
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2016-09-23       Impact factor: 4.813

Review 8.  Liver fat imaging-a clinical overview of ultrasound, CT, and MR imaging.

Authors:  Yingzhen N Zhang; Kathryn J Fowler; Gavin Hamilton; Jennifer Y Cui; Ethan Z Sy; Michelle Balanay; Jonathan C Hooker; Nikolaus Szeverenyi; Claude B Sirlin
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2018-06-06       Impact factor: 3.039

9.  Comparison of fatty liver index with noninvasive methods for steatosis detection and quantification.

Authors:  Shira Zelber-Sagi; Muriel Webb; Nimer Assy; Laurie Blendis; Hanny Yeshua; Moshe Leshno; Vlad Ratziu; Zamir Halpern; Ran Oren; Erwin Santo
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2013-01-07       Impact factor: 5.742

Review 10.  Extracellular matrix and liver disease.

Authors:  Elena Arriazu; Marina Ruiz de Galarreta; Francisco Javier Cubero; Marta Varela-Rey; María Pilar Pérez de Obanos; Tung Ming Leung; Aritz Lopategi; Aitor Benedicto; Ioana Abraham-Enachescu; Natalia Nieto
Journal:  Antioxid Redox Signal       Date:  2014-01-08       Impact factor: 8.401

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.