ArticleDigestive diseases and sciences2022
Diagnostic Value of FibroTouch and Non-invasive Fibrosis Indexes in Hepatic Fibrosis with Different Aetiologies.
Article in Digestive diseases and sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- The association between atherogenic index of plasma (AIP) and ultrasound attenuation parameter (UAP) in Chinese adults: a cross-sectional study.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Article
- Non-Invasive Tests for the Detection of MASLD: Biomarkers and Imaging for Staging Steatosis, MASH, and Fibrosis.International journal of general medicine · 2026Review
- Circulating Bone morphogenetic protein 9 (BMP9) as a new biomarker for noninvasive stratification of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease and metabolic syndrome.Clinical and experimental medicine · 2024Article
- Prognostic significance of liver stiffness in patients with primary biliary cholangitis: validation of Baveno VII criteria.Hepatology international · 2024Article
- Effect of a High Protein, Low Glycemic Index Dietary Intervention on Metabolic Dysfunction-Associated Fatty Liver Disease: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Frontiers in nutrition · 2022Article
- Retrospective Evaluation of Non-Invasive Assessment Based on Routine Laboratory Markers for Assessing Advanced Liver Fibrosis in Chronic Hepatitis B Patients.International journal of general medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLiver biopsy is the gold standard for staging liver fibrosis, but it has numerous drawbacks, mainly associated with bleeding and bile fistula risks. A number of non-invasive techniques have been investigated, but they all have their own disadvantages. To avoid the risks mentioned above and to improve the diagnostic value, we still need to search for a more accurate non-invasive method to evaluate the degree of liver fibrosis.
aimThis study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of FibroTouch versus other non-invasive fibrosis indexes in hepatic fibrosis of different aetiologies.
methodsThis study retrospectively enrolled 227 patients with chronic hepatic liver disease admitted to the first hospital of Lanzhou University from 2017 to 2020. Liver biopsy was performed in all of the patients, and their biochemical indicators were all tested. Non-invasive indexes including the fibrosis index based on four factors (FIB-4), the aminotransferase-to-platelet ratio index (APRI), and the gamma-glutamyl transpeptidase-to-platelet ratio index (GPRI) were all calculated. Transient elastography was performed using FibroTouch.
resultsThe correlation between FibroTouch and the pathology of liver fibrosis was significantly higher than that between the non-invasive fibrosis indexes and the biopsy results (r = 0.771, p < 0.05). The area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) of FibroTouch was significantly higher than that of FIB-4, APRI, and GPRI for the diagnosis of significant fibrosis (≥ S2 fibrosis stage), advanced fibrosis (≥ S3 fibrosis stage), and cirrhosis (= S4 fibrosis stage) (p < 0.05). The patients were grouped according to different aetiologies. The diagnostic value of FibroTouch had much higher credibility in different fibrosis stages for different causes compared with other non-invasive indexes. The AUC of FibroTouch showed both higher specificity and higher sensitivity than FIB-4, APRI, and GPRI for different liver fibrosis stages with different aetiologies.
conclusionsFibroTouch demonstrates the highest diagnostic value for liver fibrosis and cirrhosis among non-invasive methods, showing better results than FIB-4, APRI, and GPRI, and surpassed only by liver biopsy. FibroTouch is reliable in assessing liver fibrosis with different aetiologies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.