Skip to main content

Table 1 Comparison between the three studied groups (n = 80) according to demographic data and other different parameters

From: Validity of serum leukotriene B4 as a marker of decompensated liver cirrhosis in chronic HCV patients: leukotriene B4 in decompensated liver cirrhosis

Ā 

Group I (n = 30)

Group II (n = 30)

Group III (n = 20)

Test of Sig.

P

Gender

ā€ƒMale

19

15

7

Ļ‡2 = 3.886

0.143

ā€ƒFemale

11

15

13

Age (years)

ā€ƒMin-Max

28.0ā€“70.0

36.0ā€“79.0

21.0ā€“45.0

F = 39.150*

<ā€‰0.001*

ā€ƒMean Ā± SD

48.0 Ā± 11.06

55.47Ā±12.62

28.60Ā±5.36

ā€ƒMedian (IQR)

45.50(39.0ā€“57.0)

54.0(45.0ā€“67.0)

28.0(25.50ā€“31.0)

Degree of ascites

ā€ƒMild

-

9

-

30

-

ā€ƒModerate

-

9

-

30

ā€ƒMassive

-

12

-

40

Hepatic encephalopathy

-

17

-

Ļ‡2 = 23.721*

<ā€‰0.001*

Total bilirubin (mg/dl)

ā€ƒMin.-Max.

0.20ā€“1.40

0.50ā€“9.0

0.80ā€“1.20

H = 29.980*

<ā€‰0.001*

Serum albumin (g/dl)

ā€ƒMin.-Max.

3.50ā€“4.30

1.60ā€“3.0

4.0ā€“5.50

F = 245.85*

<ā€‰0.001*

INR

ā€ƒMin.-Max.

0.80ā€“1.50

1.10ā€“2.50

0.90ā€“1.40

F = 45.043*

<ā€‰0.001*

CRP

ā€ƒMin.-Max.

10.0ā€“18.0

24.0ā€“50.0

1.0ā€“5.0

H = 69.618*

<ā€‰0.001*

Child-Pugh Classification

ā€ƒA

30

0

NA

Ļ‡2 = 60.00*

<ā€‰0.001*

ā€ƒB

0

15

ā€ƒC

0

15

MELD/Na score

ā€ƒMin-Max

6.0ā€“18.0

10.0ā€“30.0

NA

t = 10.592*

<ā€‰0.001*

ā€ƒMean Ā± SD

10.43 Ā± 3.07

20.23 Ā± 4.03

ā€ƒMedian (IQR)

10.0 (9.0ā€“12.0)

20.0 (18.0ā€“22.0)

Serum Leukotriene B4 (ng/L)

ā€ƒMin.-Max

9.11ā€“58.73

13.62ā€“346.1

6.21ā€“47.45

H = 11.517*

0.003*

ā€ƒMean Ā± SD

21.12 Ā± 11.0

47.34 Ā± 65.18

19.83 Ā± 13.17

ā€ƒMedian (IQR)

17.90(12.63ā€“28.69)

24.27(19.59ā€“39.35)

13.11(9.13ā€“27.23)

  1. Group I: Compensated liver cirrhosis due to chronic HCV infection
  2. Group II: Decompensated liver cirrhosis due to chronic HCV infection
  3. Group III: Healthy controls
  4. INR International normalization ratio, CRP C-reactive protein, Ļ‡2 Chi-square test, H Kruskal-Wallis test, pairwise comparison bet. the 2 groups were done using post hoc test (Dunnā€™s for multiple comparisons test), F ANOVA test, pairwise comparison bet. the 2 groups were done using post hoc test (Tukey), t Studentā€™s t test, p p value for comparing between the studied groups
  5. *Statistically significant at p ā‰¤ 0.05