4.5 Article

A comparison of hepatic steatosis index, controlled attenuation parameter and ultrasound as noninvasive diagnostic tools for steatosis in chronic hepatitis B

Journal

DIGESTIVE AND LIVER DISEASE
Volume 49, Issue 8, Pages 910-917

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.dld.2017.03.013

Keywords

Assessment; Fatty liver disease; Liver biopsy; Transient elastography

Funding

  1. National Key Basic Research Project [2012CB517501]
  2. Chinese Foundation for Hepatitis Prevention and Control-WANG Bao-En Liver Fibrosis Research Fund [XJS20120501]
  3. Science and Technology Foundation of Tianjin Municipal Health Bureau [12KG119]
  4. Research project of Chinese traditional medicine and Chinese traditional medicine combined with Western medicine of Tianjin municipal health and Family Planning Commission [2015061]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Aims: To evaluate the value of noninvasive tools for diagnosis of hepatic steatosis in patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB). Methods: Consecutive treatment-naive patients with CHB with body mass index less than 30 kg/m(2) who underwent liver biopsy, ultrasound and FibroScan (R) were enrolled. The diagnostic performance of controlled attenuation parameter (CAP), hepatic steatosis index (HSI) and ultrasound for hepatic steatosis compared with liver biopsy was assessed. The areas under receiver operating characteristics curves (AUROCs) were calculated to determine the diagnostic efficacy, with comparisons using the DeLong test. Results: CAP and HSI accuracies were significantly higher than that of ultrasound to detect patients with biopsy-proven mild steatosis (S1, 65.3%, 56.5%, respectively, vs. 17.7%, chi(2) = 46.305, 31.736, both P<0.05)and moderate-severe (S2-3) steatosis (92.3%, 100%, respectively, vs. 53.8%, chi(2) = 4.887, 7.800, P= 0.037, 0.007, respectively). Both CAP and HSI had lower underestimation rates of steatosis grade than ultrasound (12%, 14.8%, respectively, vs. 29.5%, chi(2) = 9.765, 6.452; P<0.05 for both), but they exhibited higher overestimation rates (30.5%, 38.2%, respectively, vs. 12.4%, chi(2) = 39.222, 70.986; both P<0.05). The AUROCs of CAP and HSI were 0.780 (95% confidence intervals [CIs] 0.735-0.822) and 0.655 (95%CI 0.604-0.704) for S >1, 0.932 (95%CI 0.902-0.956) and 0.755 (95%CI 0.707-0.799) for S >2, 0.990 (95%CI 0.974-0.998) and 0.786 (95% CI 0.740-0.827) for S3, respectively. Conclusion: CAP might be more accurate for detecting hepatic steatosis than HSI and ultrasound in patients with CHB, but further studies are needed to reduce the overestimation rates. (C) 2017 Editrice Gastroenterologica Italiana S.r.l. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available