4.6 Article

HCV carriers with normal alanine aminotransferase levels: Healthy persons or severely ill patients? Dealing with an everyday clinical problem

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF INTERNAL MEDICINE
卷 21, 期 2, 页码 57-61

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejim.2009.12.006

关键词

Alanine aminotransferase; Biopsy; HCV; Interferon; Normal; Ribavirin

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Approximately 30% of patients with chronic HCV Infection show persistently normal ALT levels Although formerly referred to as 'healthy' or 'asymptomatic' HCV carriers, and thus historically excluded from antiviral treatment, it has now become clear that the majority of these patients have some degree of histological liver damage that may be significant in up to 20% of patients and might progress toward a more sever e degree of liver fibrosis A significant proportion of patients 20%) experience periods of Increased serum ALT (flare) associated with enhanced disease progression However, controversies still exist in clinical practice regarding the definition of 'persistent' ALT normality, the virological and histological features of these subjects, the need for liver biopsy, the role of non invasive tools for the assessment of liver fibrosis (transient hepatic elastography, fibroscan), and the natural history and optimal management of chronic hepatitis C with normal ALT The advent of new therapeutic options (pegylated interferons plus ribavirin) has shifted treatment targets toward eradication of underlying infection, with therapy decision based on age, severity of disease and likelihood of response rather than on aminotransferase levels This review does approach the main unresolved issues on this topic in the form of a dialog between a hepatologist and a patient with HCV infection but normal alanine aminotransferase levels, trying to give evidence-based answers to the more frequently asked questions from patients and their physicians (C) 2009 European Federation of Internal Medicine Published by Elsevier B V All rights reserved

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据