Evaluation of abnormal liver function tests

Abstract

Incidentally detected abnormality in liver function tests is a common situation encountered by physicians across all disciplines. Many of these patients do not have primary liver disease as most of the commonly performed markers are not specific for the liver and are affected by myriad factors unrelated to liver disease. Also, many of these tests like liver enzyme levels do not measure the function of the liver, but are markers of liver injury, which is broadly of two types: hepatocellular and cholestatic. A combination of a careful history and clinical examination along with interpretation of pattern of liver test abnormalities can often identify type and aetiology of liver disease, allowing for a targeted investigation approach. Severity of liver injury is best assessed by composite scores like the Model for End Stage Liver Disease rather than any single parameter. In this review, we discuss the interpretation of the routinely performed liver tests along with the indications and utility of quantitative tests.

Mesenchymal stem cells prolong survival and prevent lethal complications in a porcine model of fulminant liver failure

“…Aspartate transaminase, ALT, and ALP are expressed in hepatocytes or bile‐tract cells, and serum levels of these intracellular enzymes represent the extent of hepatocyte damage . On the Day 1 of post‐operation, hepatocyte loss was induced, evidenced by sharp elevation of serum AST (Figure Bi), ALT (Figure Bii), and ALP (Figure Biii) in both control and MSC transplantation groups.…”

iTRAQ-Based Proteomics Identification of Serum Biomarkers of Two Chronic Hepatitis B Subtypes Diagnosed by Traditional Chinese Medicine

“…Mean values of these diagnosis biomarkers in the blood samples of LSSD-CHB and DHSM-CHB patients were similar. In addition, the levels of ALT and AST remained at a high level, compared to healthy individuals [26, 27], which confirmed their CHB infection.…”

Reference intervals for serum bilirubin, urea, and uric acid in healthy Chinese geriatric population

“…Inaccurate RIs will lead to wrong decision which will put patients in danger. Previous research found that most RIs of clinical laboratory analytes were significantly related with age, gender, ethnicity, or regional factors …”

“…In China, a very great group of people (nearly 143 million people) are defined as elderly and elderly always seek health care more often than those who are 20‐50 years of age. We felt an urge to set up RIs for Chinese geriatric population according to their own characteristics …”

“…Previous research found that most RIs of clinical laboratory analytes were significantly related with age, gender, ethnicity, or regional factors. [1][2][3] However, most RIs are usually defined based on blood samples from healthy men or non-pregnant women in age range of 20-50 years. These values may not be optimal for elderly.…”