Diagnostic performance of FibroTest, SteatoTest and ActiTest in patients with NAFLD using the SAF score as histological reference.

BACKGROUND: Blood tests of liver injury are less well validated in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) than in patients with chronic viral hepatitis. AIMS: To improve the validation of three blood tests used in NAFLD patients, FibroTest for fibrosis staging, SteatoTest for steatosis grading and ActiTest for inflammation activity grading. METHODS: We pre-included new NAFLD patients with biopsy and blood tests from a single-centre cohort (FibroFrance) and from the multicentre FLIP consortium. Contemporaneous biopsies were blindly assessed using the new steatosis, activity and fibrosis (SAF) score, which provides a reliable and reproducible diagnosis and grading/staging of the three elementary features of NAFLD (steatosis, inflammatory activity) and fibrosis with reduced interobserver variability. We used nonbinary-ROC (NonBinAUROC) as the main endpoint to prevent spectrum effect and multiple testing. RESULTS: A total of 600 patients with reliable tests and biopsies were included. The mean NonBinAUROCs (95% CI) of tests were all significant (P < 0.0001): 0.878 (0.864-0.892) for FibroTest and fibrosis stages, 0.846 (0.830-0.862) for ActiTest and activity grades, and 0.822 (0.804-0.840) for SteatoTest and steatosis grades. FibroTest had a higher NonBinAUROC than BARD (0.836; 0.820-0.852; P = 0.0001), FIB4 (0.845; 0.829-0.861; P = 0.007) but not significantly different than the NAFLD score (0.866; 0.850-0.882; P = 0.26). FibroTest had a significant difference in median values between adjacent stage F2 and stage F1 contrarily to BARD, FIB4 and NAFLD scores (Bonferroni test P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with NAFLD, SteatoTest, ActiTest and FibroTest are non-invasive tests that offer an alternative to biopsy, and they correlate with the simple grading/staging of the SAF scoring system across the three elementary features of NAFLD: steatosis, inflammatory activity and fibrosis.

[Temporary articulating spacer with antibiotic-impregnated cement for an infected knee endoprosthesis]. / Die temporäre Antibiotikaspacerprothese bei der infizierten Knieendoprothese.

Two-stage reimplantation remains the gold standard in the treatment of late infected total knee arthroplasties. The reported disadvantages include difficult exposure at the time of reimplantation and less functional outcome by using static spacers. Patients who receive an articulating spacer retain a functional joint before second-stage reimplantation. This may reduce the disadvantages of static spacers (ligament contracture, extensor lag, arthrofibrosis). There is no difference in the success rates of eradicating infection (range: 90-96%). In a prospective study 24 consecutive patients were treated with an articulating spacer. The articulating spacer is made by cleaning and autoclaving the removed femoral component and the tibial polyethylene insert. These are reinserted during the same operation with antibiotic-loaded cement. The average time during which the spacer was in place was 16 weeks (range: 7-28 weeks). During an average follow-up period of 14.8 months (range: 5-33 months) one patient had a secondary reinfection. Use of an articulating spacer is economical and decreases the risk of complications in reimplantation with good functional outcome.