4.7 Article

Hepatic steatosis in genotype 4 chronic hepatitis C is mainly because of metabolic factors

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY
卷 102, 期 3, 页码 634-641

出版社

BLACKWELL PUBLISHING
DOI: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2006.01025.x

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BACKGROUND/AIM: Hepatic steatosis is considered to be mostly associated with viral factors in genotype 3 and metabolic factors in genotype 1 chronic hepatitis C, while there are rather few data for genotype 4. We determined the parameters associated with steatosis in 350 chronic hepatitis C patients, focusing on genotype 4. METHODS: Histological lesions were evaluated according to Ishak's classification and steatosis was semiquantitatively graded. Several patient characteristics on the biopsy day were also evaluated. RESULTS: Steatosis was present in 73% of patients without significant differences among genotypes. Moderate/severe steatosis was more frequent in genotype 3 than 4 (44% vs 26%, P = 0.025) and similar between genotype 4 and 1 patients. Moderate/severe steatosis was associated with body mass index (BMI) in genotype 4 (P = 0.023) and gamma-glutamyl-transpeptidase in genotype 3 patients (P = 0.044). In 150 nondiabetic patients with BMI <= 25 kg/m(2), moderate/severe steatosis was present in 15, 40, and 11% of genotype 1, 3, and 4 patients, respectively, (P = 0.005) and was independently associated only with genotype 3. In multivariate analysis, steatosis grade or moderate/severe steatosis was independently associated with higher BMI, genotype 3, and lower cholesterol. CONCLUSIONS: Moderate or severe steatosis is significantly less frequent in genotype 4 than 3 chronic hepatitis C patients and similar between genotype 4 and 1. In nondiabetic, nonoverweight patients, moderate or severe steatosis is present in only 10-15% of genotype 4 or 1 compared with 40% of genotype 3 patients. Thus, hepatic steatosis in genotype 4 is mostly associated with metabolic factors, similar to those in genotype 1.

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

4.7
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