ArticlePediatric cardiology2026
A Tale of METAVIR and Congestive Hepatic Fibrosis Score: Evaluating Liver Fibrosis Assessment in Fontan Patient.
Article in Pediatric cardiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
While liver biopsy is the gold standard for assessing liver fibrosis, the optimal scoring system for Fontan-associated liver disease (FALD) is debated. This study was to determine the correlation and agreement between the METAVIR score, used for chronic hepatitis, and the Congestive Hepatic Fibrosis Score (CHFS), specifically designed for congestive hepatopathy. We conducted a retrospective review of liver biopsies from 38 Fontan patients. Pathologists independently evaluated each biopsy and assigned a METAVIR fibrosis score and a CHFS. Fontan patients, a mean age of 21 ± 6 years, have undergone the Fontan operation at a mean age of 8 ± 4 years. This established a mean postoperative interval of 13 ± 4 years at the time of study enrollment. When comparing the two scoring systems, the overall weight Kappa of 0.92 suggested perfect agreement between the two methods for assessing the degree of liver fibrosis. However, a subgroup analysis of weight kappa agreement revealed significant differences based on fibrosis severity. In the low-grade fibrosis group, the agreement was substantial agreement (kappa 0.70). In sharp contrast, the high-grade liver fibrosis group (METAVIR F3-F4 and CHFS stages 3-4) demonstrated perfect agreement (kappa 0.90) between the two scoring systems. Overall, METAVIR and CHFS demonstrate strong correlation and agreement. Differences observed in early-stage fibrosis likely arise from their distinct architectural emphases; portal-based in METAVIR versus centrilobular in CHFS.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42086758What 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.