Diagnostic of FibroTouch and six serological models in assessing the degree of liver fibrosis among patients with chronic hepatic disease: A single-center retrospective study.
Journal
PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2022
2022
Historique:
received:
08
02
2022
accepted:
11
06
2022
entrez:
1
7
2022
pubmed:
2
7
2022
medline:
8
7
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic value of FibroTouch and serological models on staging hepatic fibrosis in chronic liver diseases. We recruited 850 patients undergoing liver biopsy and received FibroTouch test before or after liver biopsy within one week, blood was taken for the routine inspection before the operation within one week. The serological models were calculated by the blood results and routine clinical information. The diagnostic value of FibroTouch and six serological models was analyzed by receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC). Patients with severe liver fibrosis had significantly higher AST, ALT, GGT, RDW, ALP, and FT-LSM. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of FT-LSM for the liver diagnosis of S≥2, S≥3 and S = 4 was 0.75(95% confidence interval [CI]:0.72-0.78), 0.83(95% CI: 0.80-0.86), and 0.85 (95% CI: 0.81-0.89), respectively. The optimal cut-off of FT-LSM for diagnosing S≥2, S≥3 and S = 4 was 8.7, 10.7, and 12.3, respectively. Our study showed the FibroTouch has a higher diagnostic value compared with the non-invasive serological models in staging the fibrosis stage. The cut-off of FibroTouch and five serological models (APRI, FIB-4, S-index, Forns, and PRP) increased with the severe of fibrosis stage.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND AND AIMS
The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic value of FibroTouch and serological models on staging hepatic fibrosis in chronic liver diseases.
METHODS
We recruited 850 patients undergoing liver biopsy and received FibroTouch test before or after liver biopsy within one week, blood was taken for the routine inspection before the operation within one week. The serological models were calculated by the blood results and routine clinical information. The diagnostic value of FibroTouch and six serological models was analyzed by receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC).
RESULTS
Patients with severe liver fibrosis had significantly higher AST, ALT, GGT, RDW, ALP, and FT-LSM. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of FT-LSM for the liver diagnosis of S≥2, S≥3 and S = 4 was 0.75(95% confidence interval [CI]:0.72-0.78), 0.83(95% CI: 0.80-0.86), and 0.85 (95% CI: 0.81-0.89), respectively. The optimal cut-off of FT-LSM for diagnosing S≥2, S≥3 and S = 4 was 8.7, 10.7, and 12.3, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS
Our study showed the FibroTouch has a higher diagnostic value compared with the non-invasive serological models in staging the fibrosis stage. The cut-off of FibroTouch and five serological models (APRI, FIB-4, S-index, Forns, and PRP) increased with the severe of fibrosis stage.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35776774
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0270512
pii: PONE-D-22-01750
pmc: PMC9249238
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e0270512Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Références
Clin Transl Gastroenterol. 2021 Apr 13;12(4):e00323
pubmed: 33848277
Hepatol Int. 2017 May;11(3):286-291
pubmed: 28425016
Dig Liver Dis. 2019 Sep;51(9):1323-1329
pubmed: 30928419
Medicine (Baltimore). 2020 Feb;99(8):e19201
pubmed: 32080106
PLoS One. 2015 Dec 28;10(12):e0144425
pubmed: 26709706
J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2010 Sep;25(9):1569-77
pubmed: 20796157
Gastroenterology. 2019 Apr;156(5):1264-1281.e4
pubmed: 30660725
J Hepatol. 2019 Jul;71(1):212-221
pubmed: 30871980
Gastrointest Endosc. 2019 Feb;89(2):238-246.e3
pubmed: 30389469
Lancet. 2018 Nov 10;392(10159):1736-1788
pubmed: 30496103
Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab. 2020 May 1;318(5):E817-E829
pubmed: 32182125
J Viral Hepat. 2013 Apr;20(4):e3-10
pubmed: 23490387
World J Gastroenterol. 2012 Jun 14;18(22):2784-92
pubmed: 22719186
Pol Arch Intern Med. 2019 Mar 29;129(3):181-188
pubmed: 30778020
Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2018 Jan;22(2):479-485
pubmed: 29424906
Hepat Med. 2020 Mar 27;12:41-48
pubmed: 32280285
BMJ Open Gastroenterol. 2019 Jun 07;6(1):e000288
pubmed: 31275584
Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2020 Jul;14(7):631-638
pubmed: 32510248
Scand J Gastroenterol. 2019 Jan;54(1):81-86
pubmed: 30663454
Hepatology. 2003 Aug;38(2):518-26
pubmed: 12883497