Skip to main content

Table 2 Hepatologists’ attitude towards the use of serum markers for diagnosis of significant fibrosis and cirrhosis

From: Role of liver biopsy versus non-invasive biomarkers for diagnosis of significant fibrosis and cirrhosis: a web-based survey

Variable Patients (n = 573)
Do you know non-invasive (blood/serum) fibrosis markers for assessment of hepatic fibrosis? %
 Extremely likely (100%) 42.46
 Very likely (75%) 35.88
 Moderately likely (50%) 13.59
 Slightly likely (25%) 6.37
 Not at all likely (0%) 1.70
Do you think non-invasive (blood/serum) fibrosis markers for assessment of hepatic fibrosis are reliable? %
 Extremely likely (100%) 3.82
 Very likely (75%) 33.97
 Moderately likely (50%) 47.56
 Slightly likely (25%) 12.95
 Not at all likely (0%) 1.70
Do you think non-invasive blood/serum fibrosis markers “biomarkers” for assessment of hepatic fibrosis are acceptable by patients? %
 Extremely likely (100%) 43.95
 Very likely (75%) 40.13
 Moderately likely (50%) 12.31
 Slightly likely (25%) 2.76
 Not at all likely (0%) 0.85
Do you use non-invasive blood/serum fibrosis markers “biomarkers” for assessment of hepatic fibrosis? %
 Extremely likely (100%) 15.92
 Very likely (75%) 22.29
 Moderately likely (50%) 19.75
 Slightly likely (25%) 23.57
 Not at all likely (0%) 18.47
Which non-invasive methods for assessment of hepatic fibrosis do you use? Please choose all that apply %
 Blood/serum biomarkers 31.42
 Transient elastography 66.24
 Biomarkers and elastography 45.01
 Magnetic resonance elastography 7.86