The search result changed since you submitted your search request. Documents might be displayed in a different sort order.
  • search hit 7 of 50
Back to Result List

Comparison of ELF, FibroTest and FibroScan for the non-invasive assessment of liver fibrosis

  • Background: FibroTest (FT) is the most frequently used serum fibrosis marker and consists of an algorithm of five fibrosis markers (alfa2-macroglobulin, apolipoproteinA1, haptoglobin, GGT, bilirubin). The Enhanced Liver Fibrosis (ELF) test consists of an algorithm of three fibrosis markers (hyaluronic acid, amino-terminal propeptide-of-type-III-collagen, tissue-inhibitor of matrix-metaloproteinase-1). While a systematic review has shown comparable results for both individual markers, there has been no direct comparison of both markers. Methods: In the present study, the ELF-test was analyzed retrospectively in patients with chronic liver disease, who received a liver biopsy, transient elastography (TE) and the FibroTest using histology as the reference method. Histology was classified according to METAVIR and the Ludwig's classification (F0-F4) for patients with chronic hepatitis C and B virus (HCV, HBV) infection and primary biliary cirrhosis (PBC), respectively. Results: Seventy-four patients were analysed: 36 with HCV, 10 with HBV, and 28 with PBC. The accuracy (AUROC) for the diagnosis of significant fibrosis (F[greater than or equal to]2) for ELF and FibroTest was 0.78 (95%CI:0.67-0.89) and 0.69 (95%-CI:0.57-0.82), respectively (difference not statistically significant, n.s.). The AUROC for the diagnosis of liver cirrhosis was 0.92 (95%CI:0.83-1,00), and 0.91 (95%CI:0.83-0.99), respectively (n.s.). For 66 patients with reliable TE measurements the AUROC for the diagnosis of significant fibrosis (cirrhosis) for TE, ELF and FT were 0.80 (0.94), 0.76 (0.92), and 0.67 (0.91), respectively (n.s.). Conclusion: FibroTest and ELF can be performed with comparable diagnostic accuracy for the non-invasive staging of liver fibrosis. Serum tests are informative in a higher proportion of patients than transient elastography.

Download full text files

Export metadata

Metadaten
Author:Mireen Friedrich-RustORCiDGND, William Rosenberg, Julie Parkes, Eva HerrmannORCiDGND, Stefan ZeuzemORCiDGND, Christoph SarrazinGND
URN:urn:nbn:de:hebis:30-79714
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-230X-10-103
ISSN:1471-230X
Pubmed Id:https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20828377
Parent Title (English):BMC gastroenterology
Publisher:BioMed Central
Place of publication:London
Document Type:Article
Language:English
Date of Publication (online):2010/09/27
Date of first Publication:2010/09/09
Publishing Institution:Universitätsbibliothek Johann Christian Senckenberg
Release Date:2010/09/27
Volume:10
Issue:Art. 103
Page Number:8
First Page:1
Last Page:8
Note:
© 2010 Friedrich-Rust et al. , licensee BioMed Central Ltd. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Source:BMC Gastroenterology 2010, 10:103 ; doi:10.1186/1471-230X-10-103 ; http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-230X/10/103/
HeBIS-PPN:228370973
Institutes:Medizin / Medizin
Dewey Decimal Classification:6 Technik, Medizin, angewandte Wissenschaften / 61 Medizin und Gesundheit / 610 Medizin und Gesundheit
Sammlungen:Universitätspublikationen
Licence (German):License LogoCreative Commons - Namensnennung 2.0