Furthermore,

as per the Asian standard of BMI categories, the distribution pattern of LSM would not have been U-shaped. Although underweight subjects had significantly higher LSM values than healthy and preobese subjects, the mean difference in absolute value was only 0.5 KPa, suggesting that the body-size effect is not perceptible using the current FibroScan machines. The ULN of LSM has been reported to vary from 5.3 to 7.0 KPa in various studies,2, 3 including one study based on histopathology.2 Thus, 8.5 kPa as the ULN of LSM seems too high for a healthy liver in any given population across the world. Such a high cutoff may erroneously cause the exclusion of healthy subjects or patients who would require further evaluation. Though this value corresponded to the 95th percentile, the dispersion selleckchem of data (mean, 95%

confidence interval) revealed that 414 of 418 healthy subjects actually had LSM values within 6.5 KPa, as shown in Fig. 2 of the Das et al. study.1 Notably, sufficient investigations were not done to exclude potential underlying liver disease in healthy subjects with high LSM. Also, approximately 16% of LSM results are known to be unreliable. In our experience, in a cohort of 445 healthy adult subjects, the mean LSM value was 5.1 ± 1.1 KPa, and the 95th percentile value was 7.07 KPa. LSM values increased with increasing BMI categories (4.1 ± 0.7, 5.08 ± 0.6, and 6.08 ± 1.2 KPa in healthy BMI, overweight, and obese subjects, respectively).3 None of our patients belonged to the underweight category; hence, the distribution of LSM cannot be compared with

the present selleck kinase inhibitor study. To conclude, the present study results seem to have limited external validity. However, the background population and properly validated regional data are important while interpreting LSM 上海皓元 using FibroScan. Ramesh Kumar M.D., D.M.*, Manoj Kumar Sharma M.D., D.M.*, Shiv Kumar Sarin M.D., D.M.*, * Department of Hepatology, Institute of Liver and Biliary Sciences, New Delhi, India. “
“A 46 year-old man with hypertension, diabetes and end stage renal disease on peritoneal dialysis (PD) presented with generalized abdominal pain, distention and constipation. His abdominal exam revealed diminished bowel sounds, dullness to percussion and diffuse tenderness to deep palpation without guarding or rebound tenderness. He had a PD catheter in the right lower quadrant. Laboratory analysis revealed a WBC of 9600 cells/mm3, eosinophil count of 730 cells/mm3, hematocrit 27%, creatinine 6.2 mg/dL, blood urea nitrogen 27 mg/dL and albumin 1.5 g/dL. Serum aspartate aminotransferase, alanine aminotransferase, alkaline phosphatase, total bilirubin, amylase and lipase levels were within normal limits. Peritoneal fluid aspiration through the PD catheter revealed bloody ascites. Halfway through aspiration, the syringe plugged. Careful, brief tension was applied and a white, smooth, cylindrical specimen measuring 15.0 × 0.3 cm was extracted into the syringe (Figure 1).