Ganne-Carrié Nathalie, Ziol Marianne, de Ledinghen Victor, Douvin Catherine, Marcellin Patrick, Castera Laurent, Dhumeaux Daniel, Trinchet Jean-Claude, Beaugrand Michel
Hépato-Gastroenterologie, Hôpital Jean Verdier, Bondy, France. UPRES EA3409, Université Paris 13, Bobigny, France.
Hepatology. 2006 Dec;44(6):1511-7. doi: 10.1002/hep.21420.
A proper diagnosis of cirrhosis is essential for the management of patients with chronic liver diseases. We assessed the accuracy of liver stiffness measurement by Fibroscan for the diagnosis of cirrhosis in 1,257 patients with chronic liver diseases of various causes enrolled in a prospective multicenter study as well as clarified causes of discrepancies between liver histology and Fibroscan. One hundred thirty-two patients had unsuitable biopsy specimens, and 118 had unreliable liver stiffness measurements. Because 232 patients overlapped with a previous study, analysis was performed in the 775 new patients then derived in the whole population (1,007; 165 cirrhosis). Diagnostic accuracy was assessed by receiver operator curve (ROC) analysis. Liver samples were re-analyzed in case of discrepancies. The area under the ROC (AUROC) was 0.95 (95% CI, 0.93-0.96) for the diagnosis of cirrhosis in either 775 or 1,007 patients. The cutoff value with optimal diagnosis accuracy was 14.6 kPa in 1,007 patients (positive and negative predictive values, 74% and 96%) with discrepancies among the etiological groups. Eighty patients were misclassified: (1) among 45 patients without cirrhosis with liver stiffness 14.6 kPa or greater, 27 (60%) had extensive fibrosis and 10 (22%) significant perisinusoidal fibrosis; and (2) among 35 patients with cirrhosis and liver stiffness less than 14.6 kPa, 10 (29%) had a macronodular pattern and 25 (71%) either none or mild activity. In conclusion, Fibroscan is a reliable method for the diagnosis of cirrhosis in patients with chronic liver diseases, better at excluding than at predicting cirrhosis using a threshold of 14.6 kPa. False-negatives are mainly attributable to inactive or macronodular cirrhosis.
准确诊断肝硬化对于慢性肝病患者的管理至关重要。我们在一项前瞻性多中心研究中,评估了Fibroscan测量肝脏硬度对1257例各种病因慢性肝病患者肝硬化诊断的准确性,并阐明了肝脏组织学与Fibroscan结果存在差异的原因。132例患者的活检标本不合适,118例患者的肝脏硬度测量结果不可靠。由于232例患者与之前的研究有重叠,因此对新纳入的775例患者(总人群为1007例;其中165例为肝硬化)进行了分析。通过受试者操作特征曲线(ROC)分析评估诊断准确性。如有差异,对肝脏样本进行重新分析。在775例或1007例患者中,诊断肝硬化的ROC曲线下面积(AUROC)为0.95(95%CI,0.93 - 0.96)。在1007例患者中,诊断准确性最佳的截断值为14.6 kPa(阳性和阴性预测值分别为74%和96%),不同病因组之间存在差异。80例患者分类错误:(1)在45例肝脏硬度≥14.6 kPa但无肝硬化的患者中,27例(60%)有广泛纤维化,10例(22%)有明显的窦周纤维化;(2)在35例肝硬化但肝脏硬度<14.6 kPa的患者中,10例(29%)为大结节型,25例(71%)无或仅有轻度活动。总之,Fibroscan是诊断慢性肝病患者肝硬化的可靠方法,以14.6 kPa为阈值时,排除肝硬化比预测肝硬化效果更好。假阴性主要归因于静止性或大结节型肝硬化。