Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Figure 1.

Flow chart describing the selection of the study population.

CHB; Chronic hepatitis B, HCC; hepatocellular carcinoma.

More »

Figure 1 Expand

Table 1.

Baseline characteristics (n = 330).

More »

Table 1 Expand

Figure 2.

Box plots of FT values according to fibrosis stage.

Mean FT values increase significantly as fibrosis stage increase (0.17 for F1 (range, 0.02–0.92), 0.35 for F2 (range, 0.05–0.94), 0.6 for F3 (range, 0.02–0.96), and 0.76 for F4 (range, 0.2–0.99), all P<0.001 among fibrosis stages).

More »

Figure 2 Expand

Table 2.

Liver histology and corresponding FT values (n = 330).

More »

Table 2 Expand

Table 3.

Distribution of fibrosis stages according to histology and FT.

More »

Table 3 Expand

Figure 3.

Percentage of patients with non-discordance and those with discordance in fibrosis stage 1–2 (F1–2) vs.

fibrosis stage 3–4 (F3–4). Patients with F3–4 had the significantly higher proportion of discordance than those with F1–2 (15.4% vs. 3.0%, P<0.001).

More »

Figure 3 Expand

Table 4.

Comparison of patients with non-discordance and those with discordance.

More »

Table 4 Expand

Table 5.

Factors affecting discordance between FT and histology.

More »

Table 5 Expand

Figure 4.

Distribution of FT values according to fibrosis stage and maximal activity grade 1–2 vs. 3–4.

FT values were statistically equivalent between maximal activity grade 1–2 and 3–4 when stratified by each fibrosis stage (all P>0.05).

More »

Figure 4 Expand

Figure 5.

FT values between patients with normal ALT and those with high ALT in each fibrosis stage.

FT values were statistically equivalent between two groups (all P>0.05).

More »

Figure 5 Expand