4.3 Article

Feasibility of histological grading and staging of chronic viral hepatitis using specimens obtained by thin-needle biopsy

Journal

VIRCHOWS ARCHIV
Volume 442, Issue 3, Pages 238-244

Publisher

SPRINGER-VERLAG
DOI: 10.1007/s00428-002-0749-z

Keywords

menghini; histopathology; liver biopsy

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We performed a retrospective study to investigate the feasibility of grading and staging of chronic viral hepatitis on specimens obtained by means of thin-needle biopsy (TNB; 20G) using the modified Ishak-system (J Hepatol 1995; 22:696-699). Specimens obtained using large-needle biopsy (LNB; 17G) served as a control. A total of 100 biopsy specimens from 88 patients were included in the study. Of the patients, 30 suffered from chronic hepatitis B, 54 from chronic hepatitis C, and 4 from both; 59 specimens were obtained by TNB and 41 by LNB. All four categories of the Ishak-system, i.e., interface hepatitis, confluent necrosis, lobular inflammation and portal inflammation, could be applied to TNB specimens and provided similar total scores to those observed in LNB specimens. Specimens obtained by TNB facilitated the diagnosis of liver cirrhosis. However, they bore the risk of underestimating the presence of cirrhosis in favor of advanced bridging fibrosis, whereas no differences were found in the overall recognition of liver fibrosis. Intra- and interobserver variabilities were not affected by the needle size. For the interobserver agreement, the kappa values for the category of inflammation ranged from 0.003 to 0.419 (TNB) and 0.096 to 0.470 (LNB) and for staging we noted kappa values of 0.351 (TNB) and 0.456 (LNB). Reproducibility increased when a tolerance of 1 was accepted for grading (total score) and staging; in this case, observer variability was less than 20%. This study showed that grading and staging of chronic viral hepatitis is feasible in TNB specimens and that intra- and interobserver variability poses a greater problem than needle size.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available