4.1 Article

Influence of liver biopsy on abstinence in alcohol-dependent patients

Journal

ALCOHOL AND ALCOHOLISM
Volume 43, Issue 5, Pages 559-563

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/alcalc/agn046

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Liver biopsy indication for the evaluation of alcoholic liver disease is controversial. Our aim was to investigate the influence of the biopsy on the patients' motivation for abstinence. Methods: We retrospectively analysed, in a population of 324 patients hospitalized for alcohol withdrawal, the impact of liver biopsy on the following clinical outcomes: rapid loss to follow-up (immediately after hospital discharge), early relapse (< 3 months) and long-lasting abstinence (> 12 months). The biopsy was performed in 136 patients who had liver enzymes perturbations. Hepatic lesions were graded as mild (isolated steatosis and/or non-bridging fibrosis), moderate (bridging fibrosis and/or moderate alcoholic hepatitis) or severe (cirrhosis and/or marked alcoholic hepatitis) in 66 (48%), 41 (30%) and 29 (21%) cases, respectively. Results: In univariate analysis, patients who had a liver biopsy were less likely to be rapidly lost to follow-up (12% versus 27%, P = 0.003) but had a lower rate of long-term abstinence (20% versus 34%, P = 0.025). In multivariate analysis, age was the only factor significantly associated with clinical outcome: older patients had higher rate of long-term abstinence (OR = 1.041; P = 0.010). Among patients who had a biopsy, those with severe hepatic lesions had a lower rate of rapid relapse than those with moderate or mild lesions (32% versus 68% and 56%, P = 0.018) but the rate of long-term abstinence was similar in the three groups. Conclusion: This observational study does not support the notion that liver biopsy has a significant influence on the maintenance of alcohol abstinence in patients with alcoholic liver disease.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available