Value of Critical Flicker Frequency and Psychometric Hepatic Encephalopathy Score in Diagnosis of Low-Grade Hepatic Encephalopathy
Background & Aims: Critical flicker frequency (CFF) and psychometric hepatic encephalopathy score (PHES) analyses are widely used to diagnose hepatic encephalopathy (HE), but little is known about their value in the diagnosis of low-grade HE.Methods: The diagnostic values of CFF and PHES were co...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Autor*in: |
Kircheis, Gerald [verfasserIn] Hilger, Norbert [verfasserIn] Häussinger, Dieter [verfasserIn] |
---|
Format: |
E-Artikel |
---|---|
Sprache: |
Englisch |
Erschienen: |
2014 |
---|
Schlagwörter: |
---|
Übergeordnetes Werk: |
Enthalten in: Gastroenterology - Stanford, Calif. : HighWire Press, 1965, 146 |
---|---|
Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:146 |
DOI / URN: |
10.1053/j.gastro.2013.12.026 |
---|
Katalog-ID: |
ELV006552005 |
---|
LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
---|---|---|---|
001 | ELV006552005 | ||
003 | DE-627 | ||
005 | 20230524153209.0 | ||
007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
008 | 230505s2014 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
024 | 7 | |a 10.1053/j.gastro.2013.12.026 |2 doi | |
035 | |a (DE-627)ELV006552005 | ||
035 | |a (ELSEVIER)S0016-5085(13)01839-8 | ||
040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rda | ||
041 | |a eng | ||
082 | 0 | 4 | |a 610 |q DE-600 |
084 | |a 44.87 |2 bkl | ||
100 | 1 | |a Kircheis, Gerald |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
245 | 1 | 0 | |a Value of Critical Flicker Frequency and Psychometric Hepatic Encephalopathy Score in Diagnosis of Low-Grade Hepatic Encephalopathy |
264 | 1 | |c 2014 | |
336 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b zzz |2 rdacontent | ||
337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
520 | |a Background & Aims: Critical flicker frequency (CFF) and psychometric hepatic encephalopathy score (PHES) analyses are widely used to diagnose hepatic encephalopathy (HE), but little is known about their value in the diagnosis of low-grade HE.Methods: The diagnostic values of CFF and PHES were compared using a computerized test battery and West Haven criteria as reference. We performed CFF analysis on 559 patients with cirrhosis and 261 without (controls). Of these 820 patients, 448 were evaluated using a modified PHES system and 148 were also evaluated using the conventional PHES system.Results: CFF distinguished between patients with overt HE and without minimal or overt HE in the entire study population with 98% sensitivity and 94% specificity and in the subgroup of patients who were evaluated by conventional PHES with 97% sensitivity and 100% specificity. Conventional PHES identified patients with overt HE with 73% sensitivity and 89% specificity. CFF distinguished between patients with and without minimal HE with only 37% sensitivity but 94% specificity (entire study population). In the subgroup of patients evaluated by conventional PHES, CFF distinguished between patients with and without minimal HE with 22% sensitivity and 100% specificity; these values were similar to those for conventional PHES (30% sensitivity and 89% specificity). The modified PHES distinguished between patients with and without minimal HE with 49% sensitivity and 74% specificity. The diagnostic agreement values between CFF and conventional or modified PHES in patients with minimal HE were only 54% or 47%, respectively.Conclusions: In an analysis of patients with cirrhosis and controls, CFF distinguished between patients with overt HE and without minimal or overt HE. PHES testing produced a statistically significant difference among groups, but there was considerable overlap between controls and patients with overt HE. PHES, CFF, and a combination of PHES and CFF could not reliably distinguish patients with minimal HE from controls or those with overt HE. | ||
650 | 4 | |a Advanced Liver Disease | |
650 | 4 | |a MHE | |
650 | 4 | |a Neuropsychology | |
650 | 4 | |a Cognitive Function | |
700 | 1 | |a Hilger, Norbert |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Häussinger, Dieter |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Gastroenterology |d Stanford, Calif. : HighWire Press, 1965 |g 146 |h Online-Ressource |w (DE-627)270937293 |w (DE-600)1478699-0 |w (DE-576)078590221 |x 1528-0012 |7 nnns |
773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:146 |
912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_U | ||
912 | |a SYSFLAG_U | ||
912 | |a GBV_ELV | ||
912 | |a SSG-OLC-PHA | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_20 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_22 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_23 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_24 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_31 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_39 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_40 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_60 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_62 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_63 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_65 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_69 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_73 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_74 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_95 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_100 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_101 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_105 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_110 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_151 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_161 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_170 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_206 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_213 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_230 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_285 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_293 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_602 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2001 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2005 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2006 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2008 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2011 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2014 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4012 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4037 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4112 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4125 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4126 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4249 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4305 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4306 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4307 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4313 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4322 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4323 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4324 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4325 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4338 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4367 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4700 | ||
936 | b | k | |a 44.87 |j Gastroenterologie |
951 | |a AR | ||
952 | |d 146 |
author_variant |
g k gk n h nh d h dh |
---|---|
matchkey_str |
article:15280012:2014----::auociiafikrrqecadscoerceaiecpaoahsoenigoio |
hierarchy_sort_str |
2014 |
bklnumber |
44.87 |
publishDate |
2014 |
allfields |
10.1053/j.gastro.2013.12.026 doi (DE-627)ELV006552005 (ELSEVIER)S0016-5085(13)01839-8 DE-627 ger DE-627 rda eng 610 DE-600 44.87 bkl Kircheis, Gerald verfasserin aut Value of Critical Flicker Frequency and Psychometric Hepatic Encephalopathy Score in Diagnosis of Low-Grade Hepatic Encephalopathy 2014 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Background & Aims: Critical flicker frequency (CFF) and psychometric hepatic encephalopathy score (PHES) analyses are widely used to diagnose hepatic encephalopathy (HE), but little is known about their value in the diagnosis of low-grade HE.Methods: The diagnostic values of CFF and PHES were compared using a computerized test battery and West Haven criteria as reference. We performed CFF analysis on 559 patients with cirrhosis and 261 without (controls). Of these 820 patients, 448 were evaluated using a modified PHES system and 148 were also evaluated using the conventional PHES system.Results: CFF distinguished between patients with overt HE and without minimal or overt HE in the entire study population with 98% sensitivity and 94% specificity and in the subgroup of patients who were evaluated by conventional PHES with 97% sensitivity and 100% specificity. Conventional PHES identified patients with overt HE with 73% sensitivity and 89% specificity. CFF distinguished between patients with and without minimal HE with only 37% sensitivity but 94% specificity (entire study population). In the subgroup of patients evaluated by conventional PHES, CFF distinguished between patients with and without minimal HE with 22% sensitivity and 100% specificity; these values were similar to those for conventional PHES (30% sensitivity and 89% specificity). The modified PHES distinguished between patients with and without minimal HE with 49% sensitivity and 74% specificity. The diagnostic agreement values between CFF and conventional or modified PHES in patients with minimal HE were only 54% or 47%, respectively.Conclusions: In an analysis of patients with cirrhosis and controls, CFF distinguished between patients with overt HE and without minimal or overt HE. PHES testing produced a statistically significant difference among groups, but there was considerable overlap between controls and patients with overt HE. PHES, CFF, and a combination of PHES and CFF could not reliably distinguish patients with minimal HE from controls or those with overt HE. Advanced Liver Disease MHE Neuropsychology Cognitive Function Hilger, Norbert verfasserin aut Häussinger, Dieter verfasserin aut Enthalten in Gastroenterology Stanford, Calif. : HighWire Press, 1965 146 Online-Ressource (DE-627)270937293 (DE-600)1478699-0 (DE-576)078590221 1528-0012 nnns volume:146 GBV_USEFLAG_U SYSFLAG_U GBV_ELV SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 44.87 Gastroenterologie AR 146 |
spelling |
10.1053/j.gastro.2013.12.026 doi (DE-627)ELV006552005 (ELSEVIER)S0016-5085(13)01839-8 DE-627 ger DE-627 rda eng 610 DE-600 44.87 bkl Kircheis, Gerald verfasserin aut Value of Critical Flicker Frequency and Psychometric Hepatic Encephalopathy Score in Diagnosis of Low-Grade Hepatic Encephalopathy 2014 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Background & Aims: Critical flicker frequency (CFF) and psychometric hepatic encephalopathy score (PHES) analyses are widely used to diagnose hepatic encephalopathy (HE), but little is known about their value in the diagnosis of low-grade HE.Methods: The diagnostic values of CFF and PHES were compared using a computerized test battery and West Haven criteria as reference. We performed CFF analysis on 559 patients with cirrhosis and 261 without (controls). Of these 820 patients, 448 were evaluated using a modified PHES system and 148 were also evaluated using the conventional PHES system.Results: CFF distinguished between patients with overt HE and without minimal or overt HE in the entire study population with 98% sensitivity and 94% specificity and in the subgroup of patients who were evaluated by conventional PHES with 97% sensitivity and 100% specificity. Conventional PHES identified patients with overt HE with 73% sensitivity and 89% specificity. CFF distinguished between patients with and without minimal HE with only 37% sensitivity but 94% specificity (entire study population). In the subgroup of patients evaluated by conventional PHES, CFF distinguished between patients with and without minimal HE with 22% sensitivity and 100% specificity; these values were similar to those for conventional PHES (30% sensitivity and 89% specificity). The modified PHES distinguished between patients with and without minimal HE with 49% sensitivity and 74% specificity. The diagnostic agreement values between CFF and conventional or modified PHES in patients with minimal HE were only 54% or 47%, respectively.Conclusions: In an analysis of patients with cirrhosis and controls, CFF distinguished between patients with overt HE and without minimal or overt HE. PHES testing produced a statistically significant difference among groups, but there was considerable overlap between controls and patients with overt HE. PHES, CFF, and a combination of PHES and CFF could not reliably distinguish patients with minimal HE from controls or those with overt HE. Advanced Liver Disease MHE Neuropsychology Cognitive Function Hilger, Norbert verfasserin aut Häussinger, Dieter verfasserin aut Enthalten in Gastroenterology Stanford, Calif. : HighWire Press, 1965 146 Online-Ressource (DE-627)270937293 (DE-600)1478699-0 (DE-576)078590221 1528-0012 nnns volume:146 GBV_USEFLAG_U SYSFLAG_U GBV_ELV SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 44.87 Gastroenterologie AR 146 |
allfields_unstemmed |
10.1053/j.gastro.2013.12.026 doi (DE-627)ELV006552005 (ELSEVIER)S0016-5085(13)01839-8 DE-627 ger DE-627 rda eng 610 DE-600 44.87 bkl Kircheis, Gerald verfasserin aut Value of Critical Flicker Frequency and Psychometric Hepatic Encephalopathy Score in Diagnosis of Low-Grade Hepatic Encephalopathy 2014 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Background & Aims: Critical flicker frequency (CFF) and psychometric hepatic encephalopathy score (PHES) analyses are widely used to diagnose hepatic encephalopathy (HE), but little is known about their value in the diagnosis of low-grade HE.Methods: The diagnostic values of CFF and PHES were compared using a computerized test battery and West Haven criteria as reference. We performed CFF analysis on 559 patients with cirrhosis and 261 without (controls). Of these 820 patients, 448 were evaluated using a modified PHES system and 148 were also evaluated using the conventional PHES system.Results: CFF distinguished between patients with overt HE and without minimal or overt HE in the entire study population with 98% sensitivity and 94% specificity and in the subgroup of patients who were evaluated by conventional PHES with 97% sensitivity and 100% specificity. Conventional PHES identified patients with overt HE with 73% sensitivity and 89% specificity. CFF distinguished between patients with and without minimal HE with only 37% sensitivity but 94% specificity (entire study population). In the subgroup of patients evaluated by conventional PHES, CFF distinguished between patients with and without minimal HE with 22% sensitivity and 100% specificity; these values were similar to those for conventional PHES (30% sensitivity and 89% specificity). The modified PHES distinguished between patients with and without minimal HE with 49% sensitivity and 74% specificity. The diagnostic agreement values between CFF and conventional or modified PHES in patients with minimal HE were only 54% or 47%, respectively.Conclusions: In an analysis of patients with cirrhosis and controls, CFF distinguished between patients with overt HE and without minimal or overt HE. PHES testing produced a statistically significant difference among groups, but there was considerable overlap between controls and patients with overt HE. PHES, CFF, and a combination of PHES and CFF could not reliably distinguish patients with minimal HE from controls or those with overt HE. Advanced Liver Disease MHE Neuropsychology Cognitive Function Hilger, Norbert verfasserin aut Häussinger, Dieter verfasserin aut Enthalten in Gastroenterology Stanford, Calif. : HighWire Press, 1965 146 Online-Ressource (DE-627)270937293 (DE-600)1478699-0 (DE-576)078590221 1528-0012 nnns volume:146 GBV_USEFLAG_U SYSFLAG_U GBV_ELV SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 44.87 Gastroenterologie AR 146 |
allfieldsGer |
10.1053/j.gastro.2013.12.026 doi (DE-627)ELV006552005 (ELSEVIER)S0016-5085(13)01839-8 DE-627 ger DE-627 rda eng 610 DE-600 44.87 bkl Kircheis, Gerald verfasserin aut Value of Critical Flicker Frequency and Psychometric Hepatic Encephalopathy Score in Diagnosis of Low-Grade Hepatic Encephalopathy 2014 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Background & Aims: Critical flicker frequency (CFF) and psychometric hepatic encephalopathy score (PHES) analyses are widely used to diagnose hepatic encephalopathy (HE), but little is known about their value in the diagnosis of low-grade HE.Methods: The diagnostic values of CFF and PHES were compared using a computerized test battery and West Haven criteria as reference. We performed CFF analysis on 559 patients with cirrhosis and 261 without (controls). Of these 820 patients, 448 were evaluated using a modified PHES system and 148 were also evaluated using the conventional PHES system.Results: CFF distinguished between patients with overt HE and without minimal or overt HE in the entire study population with 98% sensitivity and 94% specificity and in the subgroup of patients who were evaluated by conventional PHES with 97% sensitivity and 100% specificity. Conventional PHES identified patients with overt HE with 73% sensitivity and 89% specificity. CFF distinguished between patients with and without minimal HE with only 37% sensitivity but 94% specificity (entire study population). In the subgroup of patients evaluated by conventional PHES, CFF distinguished between patients with and without minimal HE with 22% sensitivity and 100% specificity; these values were similar to those for conventional PHES (30% sensitivity and 89% specificity). The modified PHES distinguished between patients with and without minimal HE with 49% sensitivity and 74% specificity. The diagnostic agreement values between CFF and conventional or modified PHES in patients with minimal HE were only 54% or 47%, respectively.Conclusions: In an analysis of patients with cirrhosis and controls, CFF distinguished between patients with overt HE and without minimal or overt HE. PHES testing produced a statistically significant difference among groups, but there was considerable overlap between controls and patients with overt HE. PHES, CFF, and a combination of PHES and CFF could not reliably distinguish patients with minimal HE from controls or those with overt HE. Advanced Liver Disease MHE Neuropsychology Cognitive Function Hilger, Norbert verfasserin aut Häussinger, Dieter verfasserin aut Enthalten in Gastroenterology Stanford, Calif. : HighWire Press, 1965 146 Online-Ressource (DE-627)270937293 (DE-600)1478699-0 (DE-576)078590221 1528-0012 nnns volume:146 GBV_USEFLAG_U SYSFLAG_U GBV_ELV SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 44.87 Gastroenterologie AR 146 |
allfieldsSound |
10.1053/j.gastro.2013.12.026 doi (DE-627)ELV006552005 (ELSEVIER)S0016-5085(13)01839-8 DE-627 ger DE-627 rda eng 610 DE-600 44.87 bkl Kircheis, Gerald verfasserin aut Value of Critical Flicker Frequency and Psychometric Hepatic Encephalopathy Score in Diagnosis of Low-Grade Hepatic Encephalopathy 2014 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Background & Aims: Critical flicker frequency (CFF) and psychometric hepatic encephalopathy score (PHES) analyses are widely used to diagnose hepatic encephalopathy (HE), but little is known about their value in the diagnosis of low-grade HE.Methods: The diagnostic values of CFF and PHES were compared using a computerized test battery and West Haven criteria as reference. We performed CFF analysis on 559 patients with cirrhosis and 261 without (controls). Of these 820 patients, 448 were evaluated using a modified PHES system and 148 were also evaluated using the conventional PHES system.Results: CFF distinguished between patients with overt HE and without minimal or overt HE in the entire study population with 98% sensitivity and 94% specificity and in the subgroup of patients who were evaluated by conventional PHES with 97% sensitivity and 100% specificity. Conventional PHES identified patients with overt HE with 73% sensitivity and 89% specificity. CFF distinguished between patients with and without minimal HE with only 37% sensitivity but 94% specificity (entire study population). In the subgroup of patients evaluated by conventional PHES, CFF distinguished between patients with and without minimal HE with 22% sensitivity and 100% specificity; these values were similar to those for conventional PHES (30% sensitivity and 89% specificity). The modified PHES distinguished between patients with and without minimal HE with 49% sensitivity and 74% specificity. The diagnostic agreement values between CFF and conventional or modified PHES in patients with minimal HE were only 54% or 47%, respectively.Conclusions: In an analysis of patients with cirrhosis and controls, CFF distinguished between patients with overt HE and without minimal or overt HE. PHES testing produced a statistically significant difference among groups, but there was considerable overlap between controls and patients with overt HE. PHES, CFF, and a combination of PHES and CFF could not reliably distinguish patients with minimal HE from controls or those with overt HE. Advanced Liver Disease MHE Neuropsychology Cognitive Function Hilger, Norbert verfasserin aut Häussinger, Dieter verfasserin aut Enthalten in Gastroenterology Stanford, Calif. : HighWire Press, 1965 146 Online-Ressource (DE-627)270937293 (DE-600)1478699-0 (DE-576)078590221 1528-0012 nnns volume:146 GBV_USEFLAG_U SYSFLAG_U GBV_ELV SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 44.87 Gastroenterologie AR 146 |
language |
English |
source |
Enthalten in Gastroenterology 146 volume:146 |
sourceStr |
Enthalten in Gastroenterology 146 volume:146 |
format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
bklname |
Gastroenterologie |
institution |
findex.gbv.de |
topic_facet |
Advanced Liver Disease MHE Neuropsychology Cognitive Function |
dewey-raw |
610 |
isfreeaccess_bool |
false |
container_title |
Gastroenterology |
authorswithroles_txt_mv |
Kircheis, Gerald @@aut@@ Hilger, Norbert @@aut@@ Häussinger, Dieter @@aut@@ |
publishDateDaySort_date |
2014-01-01T00:00:00Z |
hierarchy_top_id |
270937293 |
dewey-sort |
3610 |
id |
ELV006552005 |
language_de |
englisch |
fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">ELV006552005</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230524153209.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230505s2014 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1053/j.gastro.2013.12.026</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)ELV006552005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(ELSEVIER)S0016-5085(13)01839-8</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rda</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">610</subfield><subfield code="q">DE-600</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">44.87</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Kircheis, Gerald</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Value of Critical Flicker Frequency and Psychometric Hepatic Encephalopathy Score in Diagnosis of Low-Grade Hepatic Encephalopathy</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zzz</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Background & Aims: Critical flicker frequency (CFF) and psychometric hepatic encephalopathy score (PHES) analyses are widely used to diagnose hepatic encephalopathy (HE), but little is known about their value in the diagnosis of low-grade HE.Methods: The diagnostic values of CFF and PHES were compared using a computerized test battery and West Haven criteria as reference. We performed CFF analysis on 559 patients with cirrhosis and 261 without (controls). Of these 820 patients, 448 were evaluated using a modified PHES system and 148 were also evaluated using the conventional PHES system.Results: CFF distinguished between patients with overt HE and without minimal or overt HE in the entire study population with 98% sensitivity and 94% specificity and in the subgroup of patients who were evaluated by conventional PHES with 97% sensitivity and 100% specificity. Conventional PHES identified patients with overt HE with 73% sensitivity and 89% specificity. CFF distinguished between patients with and without minimal HE with only 37% sensitivity but 94% specificity (entire study population). In the subgroup of patients evaluated by conventional PHES, CFF distinguished between patients with and without minimal HE with 22% sensitivity and 100% specificity; these values were similar to those for conventional PHES (30% sensitivity and 89% specificity). The modified PHES distinguished between patients with and without minimal HE with 49% sensitivity and 74% specificity. The diagnostic agreement values between CFF and conventional or modified PHES in patients with minimal HE were only 54% or 47%, respectively.Conclusions: In an analysis of patients with cirrhosis and controls, CFF distinguished between patients with overt HE and without minimal or overt HE. PHES testing produced a statistically significant difference among groups, but there was considerable overlap between controls and patients with overt HE. PHES, CFF, and a combination of PHES and CFF could not reliably distinguish patients with minimal HE from controls or those with overt HE.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Advanced Liver Disease</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">MHE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Neuropsychology</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Cognitive Function</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Hilger, Norbert</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Häussinger, Dieter</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Gastroenterology</subfield><subfield code="d">Stanford, Calif. : HighWire Press, 1965</subfield><subfield code="g">146</subfield><subfield code="h">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)270937293</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)1478699-0</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-576)078590221</subfield><subfield code="x">1528-0012</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:146</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ELV</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_100</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_101</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2001</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2006</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2008</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2011</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">44.87</subfield><subfield code="j">Gastroenterologie</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">146</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
author |
Kircheis, Gerald |
spellingShingle |
Kircheis, Gerald ddc 610 bkl 44.87 misc Advanced Liver Disease misc MHE misc Neuropsychology misc Cognitive Function Value of Critical Flicker Frequency and Psychometric Hepatic Encephalopathy Score in Diagnosis of Low-Grade Hepatic Encephalopathy |
authorStr |
Kircheis, Gerald |
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)270937293 |
format |
electronic Article |
dewey-ones |
610 - Medicine & health |
delete_txt_mv |
keep |
author_role |
aut aut aut |
collection |
elsevier |
remote_str |
true |
illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
issn |
1528-0012 |
topic_title |
610 DE-600 44.87 bkl Value of Critical Flicker Frequency and Psychometric Hepatic Encephalopathy Score in Diagnosis of Low-Grade Hepatic Encephalopathy Advanced Liver Disease MHE Neuropsychology Cognitive Function |
topic |
ddc 610 bkl 44.87 misc Advanced Liver Disease misc MHE misc Neuropsychology misc Cognitive Function |
topic_unstemmed |
ddc 610 bkl 44.87 misc Advanced Liver Disease misc MHE misc Neuropsychology misc Cognitive Function |
topic_browse |
ddc 610 bkl 44.87 misc Advanced Liver Disease misc MHE misc Neuropsychology misc Cognitive Function |
format_facet |
Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource |
format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
carriertype_str_mv |
cr |
hierarchy_parent_title |
Gastroenterology |
hierarchy_parent_id |
270937293 |
dewey-tens |
610 - Medicine & health |
hierarchy_top_title |
Gastroenterology |
isfreeaccess_txt |
false |
familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)270937293 (DE-600)1478699-0 (DE-576)078590221 |
title |
Value of Critical Flicker Frequency and Psychometric Hepatic Encephalopathy Score in Diagnosis of Low-Grade Hepatic Encephalopathy |
ctrlnum |
(DE-627)ELV006552005 (ELSEVIER)S0016-5085(13)01839-8 |
title_full |
Value of Critical Flicker Frequency and Psychometric Hepatic Encephalopathy Score in Diagnosis of Low-Grade Hepatic Encephalopathy |
author_sort |
Kircheis, Gerald |
journal |
Gastroenterology |
journalStr |
Gastroenterology |
lang_code |
eng |
isOA_bool |
false |
dewey-hundreds |
600 - Technology |
recordtype |
marc |
publishDateSort |
2014 |
contenttype_str_mv |
zzz |
author_browse |
Kircheis, Gerald Hilger, Norbert Häussinger, Dieter |
container_volume |
146 |
class |
610 DE-600 44.87 bkl |
format_se |
Elektronische Aufsätze |
author-letter |
Kircheis, Gerald |
doi_str_mv |
10.1053/j.gastro.2013.12.026 |
dewey-full |
610 |
author2-role |
verfasserin |
title_sort |
value of critical flicker frequency and psychometric hepatic encephalopathy score in diagnosis of low-grade hepatic encephalopathy |
title_auth |
Value of Critical Flicker Frequency and Psychometric Hepatic Encephalopathy Score in Diagnosis of Low-Grade Hepatic Encephalopathy |
abstract |
Background & Aims: Critical flicker frequency (CFF) and psychometric hepatic encephalopathy score (PHES) analyses are widely used to diagnose hepatic encephalopathy (HE), but little is known about their value in the diagnosis of low-grade HE.Methods: The diagnostic values of CFF and PHES were compared using a computerized test battery and West Haven criteria as reference. We performed CFF analysis on 559 patients with cirrhosis and 261 without (controls). Of these 820 patients, 448 were evaluated using a modified PHES system and 148 were also evaluated using the conventional PHES system.Results: CFF distinguished between patients with overt HE and without minimal or overt HE in the entire study population with 98% sensitivity and 94% specificity and in the subgroup of patients who were evaluated by conventional PHES with 97% sensitivity and 100% specificity. Conventional PHES identified patients with overt HE with 73% sensitivity and 89% specificity. CFF distinguished between patients with and without minimal HE with only 37% sensitivity but 94% specificity (entire study population). In the subgroup of patients evaluated by conventional PHES, CFF distinguished between patients with and without minimal HE with 22% sensitivity and 100% specificity; these values were similar to those for conventional PHES (30% sensitivity and 89% specificity). The modified PHES distinguished between patients with and without minimal HE with 49% sensitivity and 74% specificity. The diagnostic agreement values between CFF and conventional or modified PHES in patients with minimal HE were only 54% or 47%, respectively.Conclusions: In an analysis of patients with cirrhosis and controls, CFF distinguished between patients with overt HE and without minimal or overt HE. PHES testing produced a statistically significant difference among groups, but there was considerable overlap between controls and patients with overt HE. PHES, CFF, and a combination of PHES and CFF could not reliably distinguish patients with minimal HE from controls or those with overt HE. |
abstractGer |
Background & Aims: Critical flicker frequency (CFF) and psychometric hepatic encephalopathy score (PHES) analyses are widely used to diagnose hepatic encephalopathy (HE), but little is known about their value in the diagnosis of low-grade HE.Methods: The diagnostic values of CFF and PHES were compared using a computerized test battery and West Haven criteria as reference. We performed CFF analysis on 559 patients with cirrhosis and 261 without (controls). Of these 820 patients, 448 were evaluated using a modified PHES system and 148 were also evaluated using the conventional PHES system.Results: CFF distinguished between patients with overt HE and without minimal or overt HE in the entire study population with 98% sensitivity and 94% specificity and in the subgroup of patients who were evaluated by conventional PHES with 97% sensitivity and 100% specificity. Conventional PHES identified patients with overt HE with 73% sensitivity and 89% specificity. CFF distinguished between patients with and without minimal HE with only 37% sensitivity but 94% specificity (entire study population). In the subgroup of patients evaluated by conventional PHES, CFF distinguished between patients with and without minimal HE with 22% sensitivity and 100% specificity; these values were similar to those for conventional PHES (30% sensitivity and 89% specificity). The modified PHES distinguished between patients with and without minimal HE with 49% sensitivity and 74% specificity. The diagnostic agreement values between CFF and conventional or modified PHES in patients with minimal HE were only 54% or 47%, respectively.Conclusions: In an analysis of patients with cirrhosis and controls, CFF distinguished between patients with overt HE and without minimal or overt HE. PHES testing produced a statistically significant difference among groups, but there was considerable overlap between controls and patients with overt HE. PHES, CFF, and a combination of PHES and CFF could not reliably distinguish patients with minimal HE from controls or those with overt HE. |
abstract_unstemmed |
Background & Aims: Critical flicker frequency (CFF) and psychometric hepatic encephalopathy score (PHES) analyses are widely used to diagnose hepatic encephalopathy (HE), but little is known about their value in the diagnosis of low-grade HE.Methods: The diagnostic values of CFF and PHES were compared using a computerized test battery and West Haven criteria as reference. We performed CFF analysis on 559 patients with cirrhosis and 261 without (controls). Of these 820 patients, 448 were evaluated using a modified PHES system and 148 were also evaluated using the conventional PHES system.Results: CFF distinguished between patients with overt HE and without minimal or overt HE in the entire study population with 98% sensitivity and 94% specificity and in the subgroup of patients who were evaluated by conventional PHES with 97% sensitivity and 100% specificity. Conventional PHES identified patients with overt HE with 73% sensitivity and 89% specificity. CFF distinguished between patients with and without minimal HE with only 37% sensitivity but 94% specificity (entire study population). In the subgroup of patients evaluated by conventional PHES, CFF distinguished between patients with and without minimal HE with 22% sensitivity and 100% specificity; these values were similar to those for conventional PHES (30% sensitivity and 89% specificity). The modified PHES distinguished between patients with and without minimal HE with 49% sensitivity and 74% specificity. The diagnostic agreement values between CFF and conventional or modified PHES in patients with minimal HE were only 54% or 47%, respectively.Conclusions: In an analysis of patients with cirrhosis and controls, CFF distinguished between patients with overt HE and without minimal or overt HE. PHES testing produced a statistically significant difference among groups, but there was considerable overlap between controls and patients with overt HE. PHES, CFF, and a combination of PHES and CFF could not reliably distinguish patients with minimal HE from controls or those with overt HE. |
collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_U SYSFLAG_U GBV_ELV SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 |
title_short |
Value of Critical Flicker Frequency and Psychometric Hepatic Encephalopathy Score in Diagnosis of Low-Grade Hepatic Encephalopathy |
remote_bool |
true |
author2 |
Hilger, Norbert Häussinger, Dieter |
author2Str |
Hilger, Norbert Häussinger, Dieter |
ppnlink |
270937293 |
mediatype_str_mv |
c |
isOA_txt |
false |
hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
doi_str |
10.1053/j.gastro.2013.12.026 |
up_date |
2024-07-06T21:46:19.183Z |
_version_ |
1803867787556290560 |
fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">ELV006552005</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230524153209.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230505s2014 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1053/j.gastro.2013.12.026</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)ELV006552005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(ELSEVIER)S0016-5085(13)01839-8</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rda</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">610</subfield><subfield code="q">DE-600</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">44.87</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Kircheis, Gerald</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Value of Critical Flicker Frequency and Psychometric Hepatic Encephalopathy Score in Diagnosis of Low-Grade Hepatic Encephalopathy</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zzz</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Background & Aims: Critical flicker frequency (CFF) and psychometric hepatic encephalopathy score (PHES) analyses are widely used to diagnose hepatic encephalopathy (HE), but little is known about their value in the diagnosis of low-grade HE.Methods: The diagnostic values of CFF and PHES were compared using a computerized test battery and West Haven criteria as reference. We performed CFF analysis on 559 patients with cirrhosis and 261 without (controls). Of these 820 patients, 448 were evaluated using a modified PHES system and 148 were also evaluated using the conventional PHES system.Results: CFF distinguished between patients with overt HE and without minimal or overt HE in the entire study population with 98% sensitivity and 94% specificity and in the subgroup of patients who were evaluated by conventional PHES with 97% sensitivity and 100% specificity. Conventional PHES identified patients with overt HE with 73% sensitivity and 89% specificity. CFF distinguished between patients with and without minimal HE with only 37% sensitivity but 94% specificity (entire study population). In the subgroup of patients evaluated by conventional PHES, CFF distinguished between patients with and without minimal HE with 22% sensitivity and 100% specificity; these values were similar to those for conventional PHES (30% sensitivity and 89% specificity). The modified PHES distinguished between patients with and without minimal HE with 49% sensitivity and 74% specificity. The diagnostic agreement values between CFF and conventional or modified PHES in patients with minimal HE were only 54% or 47%, respectively.Conclusions: In an analysis of patients with cirrhosis and controls, CFF distinguished between patients with overt HE and without minimal or overt HE. PHES testing produced a statistically significant difference among groups, but there was considerable overlap between controls and patients with overt HE. PHES, CFF, and a combination of PHES and CFF could not reliably distinguish patients with minimal HE from controls or those with overt HE.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Advanced Liver Disease</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">MHE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Neuropsychology</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Cognitive Function</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Hilger, Norbert</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Häussinger, Dieter</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Gastroenterology</subfield><subfield code="d">Stanford, Calif. : HighWire Press, 1965</subfield><subfield code="g">146</subfield><subfield code="h">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)270937293</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)1478699-0</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-576)078590221</subfield><subfield code="x">1528-0012</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:146</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ELV</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_100</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_101</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2001</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2006</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2008</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2011</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">44.87</subfield><subfield code="j">Gastroenterologie</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">146</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
score |
7.400221 |