4.5 Article

INR-to-platelet ratio (INPR) as a novel noninvasive index for predicting liver fibrosis in chronic hepatitis B

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCIENCES
卷 18, 期 5, 页码 1159-1166

出版社

IVYSPRING INT PUBL
DOI: 10.7150/ijms.51799

关键词

international normalized ratio; INR; platelet; liver fibrosis; chronic hepatitis B

资金

  1. Medical Guidance Project of Shanghai Science and Technology Committee [19401931600]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study aimed to investigate the impact of a new index, INPR, on determining liver fibrosis stage in patients with CHB. INPR was found to have good predictive efficacy and can be used as an accurate, inexpensive indicator for evaluating liver fibrosis.
Objective: We aimed to investigate whether a novel noninvasive index, i.e., the international normalized ratio-to-platelet ratio (INPR), was a variable in determining liver fibrosis stage in patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB). Methods: A total of 543 treatment-naive CHB patients were retrospectively enrolled. Liver histology was assessed according to the Metavir scoring scheme. All common demographic and clinical parameters were analyzed. Results: Based on routine clinical parameters (age, sex, HBeAg status, HBV DNA, hematological parameters, coagulation index, and liver biochemical indicators), a novel index, i.e., the INR-to-platelet ratio (INPR), was developed to magnify the unfavorable effects of liver fibrosis on INR and platelets. The AUCs of INPR for predicting significant fibrosis, advanced fibrosis, and cirrhosis were 0.74, 0.76 and 0.86, respectively. Compared with APRI, FIB-4, and GPR, the INPR had comparable predictive efficacy for significant fibrosis and better predictive performance for advanced fibrosis and cirrhosis. Conclusion: INPR could be an accurate, easily calculated and inexpensive index to assess liver fibrosis in patients with CHB. Further studies are needed to verify this indicator and compare it with other noninvasive methods for predicting liver fibrosis in CHB patients.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据