Article

Food intake increases liver stiffness in patients with chronic or resolved hepatitis C virus infection

Department of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Endocrinology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany.
Liver international: official journal of the International Association for the Study of the Liver (Impact Factor: 4.41). 10/2009; 29(10):1500-6. DOI: 10.1111/j.1478-3231.2009.02100.x
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Transient elastography is increasingly being used in patients with chronic liver disease. It has proven particularly useful to identify patients with advanced fibrosis or cirrhosis, while classification of no or little fibrosis appears to be difficult. In general, stiffness values <6 kPa are considered normal, whereas patients with higher levels are candidates for a disease-specific treatment or further diagnostic evaluation. Parameters influencing liver stiffness may include food intake that increases liver blood flow.
In a pilot study, transient elastography was performed in eight patients with chronic hepatitis C at fasting and serially for 180 min after intake of a standardized breakfast. Confirmatory, 56 patients and 19 controls underwent liver stiffness determination at fasting, directly after meal intake and 1 h after breakfast.
Liver stiffness significantly increased immediately after food intake for up to 60 min (P=0.01) before normalizing after 180 min. An intraindividual analysis showed a significant increase in 22 out of 43 patients with an initial liver stiffness <or=10 kPa. An increase of at least 1 kPa after food intake was found in 24 out of 43 (56%) patients with initial stiffness <or=10 kPa. Notably, nine out of 23 (39%) patients with normal initial liver stiffness (<6 kPa) had a value of >6 kPa after food intake, potentially leading to unnecessary treatment or diagnostic procedures.
Food intake increases liver stiffness in patients with hepatitis C virus infection and healthy controls. To standardize liver stiffness evaluation, we suggest measurement in the fasting condition.

1 Bookmark
 · 
253 Views
  • Hepatology 10/2013; DOI:10.1002/hep.26918 · 11.19 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To evaluate the association between liver stiffness (LS) prior to the initiation of dual/triple therapy and viral response. LS was measured in all patients before treatment was administered. The therapeutic approach was based on hepatic, virological, and immunological evaluations and considered the fact that patients with severe fibrosis (F3) or compensated cirrhosis (F4) in Child-Pugh class A are the primary candidates for triple therapy. In total, 65 hepatitis C virus (HCV) patients were treated with Peg-interferon/ribavirin (Peg-IFN/RBV); 24 patients were classified as genotypes 1/4 (36.92%), and 41 patients were classified as genotypes 2/3 (63.08%) (dual therapy). In addition, 20 HCV treatment-experienced genotype 1 patients were treated with PegIFN-RBV and boceprevir (triple therapy). Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were used to compare the groups. LS significantly differed between dual therapy and triple therapy (P = 0.002). The mean LS value before dual therapy treatment was 8.61 ± 5.79 kPa and was significantly different between patients achieving a sustained virologic response (SVR) 24 weeks after therapy and those who did not (7.23 ± 5.18 kPa vs 11.72 ± 5.99 kPa, respectively, P = 0.0003). The relative risk of non-response to therapy was 4.45 (95%CI: 2.32-8.55). The attributable risk of non-response to therapy was 49%. The mean LS value before triple therapy treatment was 13.29 ± 8.57 kPa and was significantly different between patients achieving and not achieving SVR24 (9.41 ± 5.05 vs 19.11 ± 9.74, respectively; P = 0.008). The relative risk of non-response to therapy was 5.57% (95%CI: 1.50-20.65). The attributable risk of non-response to therapy (70%) was increased compared with dual therapy patients. Pre-treatment stiffness > 12 kPa was significantly associated with non-SVR (P < 0.025) in both groups. Pre-treatment liver stiffness may be useful for predicting the response to treatment in patients treated with either dual or triple anti-HCV therapy.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Liver cirrhosis is a common and growing public health problem globally. The diagnosis of cirrhosis portends an increased risk of morbidity and mortality. Liver biopsy is considered the gold standard for diagnosis of cirrhosis and staging of fibrosis. However, despite its universal use, liver biopsy is an invasive and inaccurate gold standard with numerous drawbacks. In order to overcome the limitations of liver biopsy, a number of non-invasive techniques have been investigated for the assessment of cirrhosis. This review will focus on currently available non-invasive markers of cirrhosis. The evidence behind the use of these markers will be highlighted, along with an assessment of diagnostic accuracy and performance characteristics of each test. Non-invasive markers of cirrhosis can be radiologic or serum-based. Radiologic techniques based on ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging and elastography have been used to assess liver fibrosis. Serum-based biomarkers of cirrhosis have also been developed. These are broadly classified into indirect and direct markers. Indirect biomarkers reflect liver function, which may decline with the onset of cirrhosis. Direct biomarkers, reflect extracellular matrix turnover, and include molecules involved in hepatic fibrogenesis. On the whole, radiologic and serum markers of fibrosis correlate well with biopsy scores, especially when excluding cirrhosis or excluding fibrosis. This feature is certainly clinically useful, and avoids liver biopsy in many cases.