A210 HEPATOLITHIASIS IS A FREQUENT AND PROGNOSTIC FINDING IN PATIENTS WITH PRIMARY SCLEROSING CHOLANGITIS
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Aims Intrahepatic biliary stones (hepatolithiasis) are not well characterised in patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC). Methods Chart reviews were conducted on 302 patients with a histologic or radiographic diagnosis of PSC followed at the Toronto Centre for Liver Disease. Radiographic data were collected for patients between the years 2008–2018. Depending on frequency of testing, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and ultrasound (US) data was reviewed every 3–5 years. We assessed factors associated with hepatolithiasis based on sex, race, age and phenotype of PSC and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Qualitative radiographic findings on image report review, episodes of cholangitis, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and occurrence of cholangiocarcinoma (CCA), death and transplant were documented. Data are reported with median and IQR and analysed using χ 2 and Mann-Whitney U tests. Results 302 patients were reviewed. The median time to follow-up, defined as from date of diagnosis to last clinic visit or to transplantation date, was 98 months (IQR = 87). The mean age at diagnosis was 38 (SD = 15.1) years; 54% of patients were male. A total of 224 patients had IBD (74%). Of the 302 patients, 80 patients (26%) had evidence of hepatolithiasis on US or MRI. Patients with hepatolithiasis were more likely to be younger (37.4 vs 39.1, p = 0.025), male (65% vs. 50%, p = 0.021), and have large duct disease (99% vs. 88%, p = 0.004). Imaging report review revealed patients with hepatolithiasis were more likely to have intrahepatic biliary thickening (76% vs. 45%, p < 0.001), extrahepatic biliary thickening (69% vs. 50%, p = 0.003), focal biliary dilation (96% vs. 78%, p < 0.001) and disease characterised by more reported strictures on qualitative imaging report review (89% vs 69%, p < 0.001). Concomitant presence of cholelithiasis was greater in the hepatolithiasis vs. the non-hepatolithiasis group (45% vs. 19%, p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in the prevalence of hepatic or portal venous thrombosis in both groups. Patients with hepatolithiasis more likely have experienced acute ascending cholangitis (50% vs. 20%, p < 0.001) and need for ERCP (50% vs. 35%, p = 0.020). CCA was numerically higher in the hepatolithiasis group (8.75% vs. 4%, p = 0.1). Patients with hepatolithiasis received transplant more frequently (26.3% vs 12.2%, p < 0.001) with no significant difference in mortality. Conclusions Hepatolithiasis is common in PSC and associated with an increased clinical and radiologic disease burden. Funding Agencies None
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».