Literature DB >> 25259621

A comparison of FibroMeter™ NAFLD Score, NAFLD fibrosis score, and transient elastography as noninvasive diagnostic tools for hepatic fibrosis in patients with biopsy-proven non-alcoholic fatty liver disease.

Umut Emre Aykut1, Umit Akyuz, Atakan Yesil, Fatih Eren, Fatma Gerin, Rabia Ergelen, Cigdem Ataizi Celikel, Yusuf Yilmaz.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Noninvasive markers that purport to distinguish patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) with fibrosis from those without must be evaluated rigorously for their classification accuracy. Herein, we seek to compare the diagnostic performances of three different noninvasive methods (FibroMeter™ NAFLD score, NAFLD Fibrosis score (NFSA), and Transient Elastrography [TE]) for the detection of liver fibrosis in NAFLD patients.
METHODS: A total of 88 patients with biopsy-proven NAFLD were included. The Kleiner system was used for grading fibrosis in liver biopsies. The FibroMeter™ NAFLD score was determined using a proprietary algorithm (regression score). The NFSA score was calculated based on age, hyperglycemia, body mass index, platelets, albumin and serum aminotransferase levels. TE was performed using the Fibroscan apparatus.
RESULTS: The sensitivities/specificities for the FibroMeter™ NAFLD score, NFSA, and TE for the diagnosis of significant fibrosis (F2 + F3 + F4 fibrosis) were 38.6%/86.4%, 52.3%/88.6%, and 75.0%/93.2%, respectively. The areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves of TE were significantly higher than those of both the FibroMeter™ NAFLD score and NFSA. No significant differences were found between the FibroMeter™ NAFLD score and NFSA for the detection of significant and severe fibrosis, although the diagnostic performance of the FibroMeter™ NAFLD score was higher than that of the NFSA score for cirrhosis.
CONCLUSIONS: In summary, TE showed the best diagnostic performance for the noninvasive assessment of liver fibrosis in NAFLD patients. The diagnostic performances of the FibroMeter™ NAFLD score and NFSA did not differ significantly for the detection of both significant and severe fibrosis.

Entities:  

Keywords:  FibroMeter™ NAFLD score; Fibroscan; NAFLD fibrosis score; fibrosis; non-alcoholic fatty liver disease; transient elastography

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25259621     DOI: 10.3109/00365521.2014.958099

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Scand J Gastroenterol        ISSN: 0036-5521            Impact factor:   2.423


  16 in total

1.  Oral Diseases Associated with Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease in the United States.

Authors:  J A Weintraub; G Lopez Mitnik; B A Dye
Journal:  J Dent Res       Date:  2019-08-01       Impact factor: 6.116

Review 2.  Noninvasive imaging biomarker assessment of liver fibrosis by elastography in NAFLD.

Authors:  Elliot B Tapper; Rohit Loomba
Journal:  Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2018-02-21       Impact factor: 46.802

3.  Measurement of Liver Stiffness with 2D-Shear Wave Elastography (2D-SWE) in Bariatric Surgery Candidates Reveals Acceptable Diagnostic Yield Compared to Liver Biopsy.

Authors:  Tannaz Jamialahmadi; Mohsen Nematy; Ali Jangjoo; Ladan Goshayeshi; Reza Rezvani; Kamran Ghaffarzadegan; Mehdi Jabbari Nooghabi; Payman Shalchian; Mahtab Zangui; Zeinab Javid; Saeid Doaei; Farnood Rajabzadeh
Journal:  Obes Surg       Date:  2019-08       Impact factor: 4.129

4.  Accuracy of controlled attenuation parameter (CAP) and liver stiffness measurement (LSM) for assessing steatosis and fibrosis in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Yu-Tian Cao; Liu-Lan Xiang; Fang Qi; Yu-Juan Zhang; Yi Chen; Xi-Qiao Zhou
Journal:  EClinicalMedicine       Date:  2022-07-10

5.  Modified thresholds for fibrosis risk scores in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease are necessary in the obese.

Authors:  Geraldine J Ooi; Paul R Burton; Lisa Doyle; John M Wentworth; Prithi S Bhathal; Ken Sikaris; Michael A Cowley; Stuart K Roberts; William Kemp; Paul E O'Brien; Wendy A Brown
Journal:  Obes Surg       Date:  2017-01       Impact factor: 4.129

Review 6.  From the origin of NASH to the future of metabolic fatty liver disease.

Authors:  Andreas Geier; Dina Tiniakos; Helmut Denk; Michael Trauner
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2021-02-25       Impact factor: 23.059

7.  Identifying nonalcoholic fatty liver disease patients with active fibrosis by measuring extracellular matrix remodeling rates in tissue and blood.

Authors:  Martin L Decaris; Kelvin W Li; Claire L Emson; Michelle Gatmaitan; Shanshan Liu; Yenny Wang; Edna Nyangau; Marc Colangelo; Thomas E Angel; Carine Beysen; Jeffrey Cui; Carolyn Hernandez; Len Lazaro; David A Brenner; Scott M Turner; Marc K Hellerstein; Rohit Loomba
Journal:  Hepatology       Date:  2016-11-15       Impact factor: 17.425

Review 8.  The Role of Vitamins in the Pathogenesis of Non-alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease.

Authors:  Jiawei Li; Paul Cordero; Vi Nguyen; Jude A Oben
Journal:  Integr Med Insights       Date:  2016-04-27

Review 9.  Micronutrient Antioxidants and Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease.

Authors:  Guanliang Chen; Yinhua Ni; Naoto Nagata; Liang Xu; Tsuguhito Ota
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2016-08-23       Impact factor: 5.923

10.  Discrimination of Nonalcoholic Steatohepatitis Using Transient Elastography in Patients with Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease.

Authors:  Hye Won Lee; Soo Young Park; Seung Up Kim; Jae Young Jang; Hana Park; Ja Kyung Kim; Chun Kyon Lee; Young Eun Chon; Kwang-Hyub Han
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-06-10       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.