Transient hepatic elastography has the best performance to evaluate liver fibrosis in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD).

INTRODUCTION AND AIM: The gold-standard for fibrosis diagnosis in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is liver biopsy, despite its invasive approach, sampling limitations and variability among observers. The objective was to validate the performance of non-invasive methods (Fibroscan™; APRI, FIB4 and NAFLD score) comparing with liver biopsy in the evaluation of liver fibrosis in patients with NAFLD. MATERIAL AND METHODS: NAFLD patients ≥18 years of age who were submitted to liver biopsy were included and evaluated at two reference tertiary hospitals in Brazil with transient hepatic elastography (THE) assessment through Fibroscan™, APRI, FIB4 and NAFLD scores were determined. Sensitivity, specificity, positive (PPV) and negative (NPV) predictive values for the diagnosis of advanced fibrosis were calculated to evaluate the performance of these non-invasive methods in NAFLD patients, adopting liver biopsy as the gold standard. RESULTS: A total of 104 patients were studied. At three different cutoff values (7.9, 8.7 and 9.6kPa) THE presented the highest sensitivity values (95%, 90% and 85% respectively), and the highest NPV (98%, 96.4% and 95.1% respectively) for the diagnosis of advanced fibrosis. It also presented the highest AUROC (0.87; CI 95% 0.78-0.97). CONCLUSION: When compared to the gold standard, transient hepatic elastography presented the best performance for the diagnosis and exclusion of advanced fibrosis in patients with NAFLD, overcoming APRI, FIB4 and NAFLD score.

Intermediate fibrosis staging in hepatitis C: a problem not overcome by optimal samples or pathologists' expertise.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The prediction of intermediate stage of fibrosis in chronic hepatitis C represents a prognostic factor for disease progression. Studies evaluating biopsy performance in intermediate stage considering current patterns of liver samples and pathologists' variability are scarce. We aimed to evaluate the effect of optimal liver specimens (≥ 20 mm and/or ≥ 11 portal tracts) and pathologists' expertise on agreement for intermediate stage of fibrosis in chronic hepatitis C. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Guided biopsies with large TruCut needle were initially scored by four pathologists with different expertise in liver disease and posteriorly reviewed by a reference hepatopathologist to evaluate fibrosis agreement. RESULTS: Of the 255 biopsies initially selected, 240 met the criteria of an optimal fragment (mean length 24 ± 5 mm; 16 ± 6 portal tracts) and were considered for analysis. The overall agreement among all fibrosis stages was 77% (κ = 0.66); intraobserver and interobserver agreement was, respectively, 97% (k = 0.96) and 73% (κ = 0.60). Excluded samples (< 20 mm and < 11 portal tracts) presented a lower agreement (40%; κ = 0.24). Stratifying fibrosis stages, an interobserver agreement of 42% was found in intermediate stage (F2), ranging from 0 to 56% according to pathologists' expertise, compared to 97% in mild (F0-F1) and 72% in advanced fibrosis (≥ F3) (p < 0.001). Of the 23% misclassified cases, fibrosis understaging occurred in 82% of specimens, predominantly in F2, even when evaluated by a hepatopathologist. CONCLUSIONS: Liver biopsy presents intrinsic limitations to assess intermediate stage of fibrosis not overcome by optimal samples and experienced pathologists' analysis, and should not be considered the gold standard method to evaluate intermediate fibrosis in chronic hepatitis C.

Transient elastography evaluation of hepatic and spleen stiffness in patients with hepatosplenic schistosomiasis.

BACKGROUND: Hepatosplenic schistosomiasis (HES) has not been evaluated by transient elastography so far and its correlation with ultrasound variables remains to be defined. AIMS: The aim of this study was to describe the parameters of liver and spleen stiffness in HES assessed by transient elastography in comparison with cirrhotics and controls evaluating its correlation with ultrasonographic data. PATIENTS AND METHODS: HES, hepatitis C virus-cirrhotic, and control patients were included in this sectional study. Liver and spleen stiffness were compared among the three groups. The ultrasonographic parameters were compared with transient elastography in HES patients. RESULTS: Thirty HES, 30 hepatitis C virus-cirrhotic patients, and 17 controls were included. Those with HES presented liver stiffness that was significantly higher than the controls and lower than the cirrhotics: 9.7 (3.6-75.0) versus 3.7 (2.8-5.4) versus 27.0 (14.7-61.5) kPa (P<0.001). Spleen stiffness values were comparable between hepatosplenic and cirrhotics: 66.4 (25.7-75.0) versus 69.1 (18.0-75.0) kPa (P=0.78) and were significantly higher than the controls 16.5 kPa (6.3-34.3) (P<0.001). In patients with HES, high spleen stiffness was associated with right liver lobe diameter (P=0.015), splenic artery resistance index (P=0.002), portal vein diameter (P=0.021), portal vein area (P=0.008), portal vein congestion index (P=0.035), splenic vein diameter (P=0.013), and spleen diameter (P=0.021). CONCLUSION: Liver stiffness may be a useful tool to differentiate portal hypertension related to cirrhosis from that of HES. High spleen stiffness is a potential surrogate marker of portal hypertension in this population.