Journal of Hepatology
Volume 54, Issue 1 , Pages 160-163, January 2011

Comparison of NAFLD fibrosis score and BARD score in predicting fibrosis in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease

  • Gabriela Ruffillo

      Affiliations

    • Liver Unit, Hospital Nacional Profesor Alejandro Posadas, El Palomar, Buenos Aires, Argentina
  • ,
  • Eduardo Fassio

      Affiliations

    • Liver Unit, Hospital Nacional Profesor Alejandro Posadas, El Palomar, Buenos Aires, Argentina
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author. Address: Belgrano 1.102, Ramos Mejía, provincia de Buenos Aires, CP 1704, Argentina. Tel.: +54 11 4659 8731.
  • ,
  • Estela Alvarez

      Affiliations

    • Pathology Service, Hospital Nacional Profesor Alejandro Posadas, El Palomar, Buenos Aires, Argentina
  • ,
  • Graciela Landeira

      Affiliations

    • Liver Unit, Hospital Nacional Profesor Alejandro Posadas, El Palomar, Buenos Aires, Argentina
  • ,
  • Cristina Longo

      Affiliations

    • Liver Unit, Hospital Nacional Profesor Alejandro Posadas, El Palomar, Buenos Aires, Argentina
  • ,
  • Nora Domínguez

      Affiliations

    • Liver Unit, Hospital Nacional Profesor Alejandro Posadas, El Palomar, Buenos Aires, Argentina
  • ,
  • Gisela Gualano

      Affiliations

    • Liver Unit, Hospital Nacional Profesor Alejandro Posadas, El Palomar, Buenos Aires, Argentina

Received 7 April 2010; received in revised form 11 June 2010; accepted 14 June 2010. published online 31 August 2010.

Background & Aims

Liver biopsy (LB) is the only means to evaluate fibrosis in NAFLD. Two scoring systems, NAFLD fibrosis score and BARD score, were proposed to separate cases with and without severe fibrosis (SF). Our aim was to compare the utility of both scores in patients with biopsy-proven NAFLD.

Methods

138 consecutive patients of our series were included (67 male, median age 49years). A NAFLD fibrosis score lower than −1.455 would exclude SF. A score greater than 0.676 would predict SF. An intermediate score is defined as indeterminate. The BARD score ranges from 0 to 4. Scores 0–1 are considered to have a high negative predictive value (NPV) for SF. The results of the scores were compared with LB staging. NPV, positive predictive value (PPV) and area under the ROC curve (AUROC) were calculated for both systems.

Results

A total of 37 patients had SF. NAFLD fibrosis score was indeterminate in 42 cases. Among the 91 patients with low score, 74 did not have SF but 17 patients had SF. All of 5 patients with a high score had SF. Sensitivity was 22.7%; specificity, 100%; NPV, 81.3%; and PPV, 100%. The BARD score was low in 96 patients and high in 42. Among the 96 patients with a low score, 78 did not have SF but 18 did. Among 42 patients with a high score, 19 had SF. Sensitivity was 51.4%; specificity, 77.2%; NPV, 81.3%; and PPV, 45.2%. AUROC were 0.68 (95% CI, 0.57–0.78) and 0.67 (95% CI, 0.56–0.77) for NAFLD fibrosis and BARD scores, respectively.

Conclusions

Both systems were useful in identifying patients without SF (NPV 81.3%) but the BARD score is easier to estimate and does not have indeterminate results.

Keywords: Nonalcoholic steatohepatitis, Severe liver fibrosis, Advanced liver fibrosis, Noninvasive prediction of fibrosis, Prognosis of NAFLD

Abbreviations: LB, liver biopsy, NAFLD, nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, ROC curve, receiver operating characteristic curve, AUROC, area under the ROC curve, SF, severe fibrosis, NPV, negative predictive value, PPV, positive predictive value, NASH, nonalcoholic steatohepatitis, ELF, Enhanced Liver fibrosis panel, IFG, impaired fasting glucose, BMI, body mass index, AST, aspartate aminotransferase, ALT, alanine aminotransferase, OR, odds ratio, CI, confidence intervals

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S0168-8278(10)00718-X

doi:10.1016/j.jhep.2010.06.028

Journal of Hepatology
Volume 54, Issue 1 , Pages 160-163, January 2011