Evidence Hub

Systematic review with meta-analysis: neuroimaging in hepatitis C chronic infection

Oriolo G, Egmond E, Mariño Z, Cavero M, Navines R, Zamarrenho L, Solà R, Pujol J et al.

Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics, 2018

12 participants

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Chronic hepatitis C is considered a systemic disease because of extra-hepatic manifestations. Neuroimaging has been employed in hepatitis C virus-infected patients to find in vivo evidence of central nervous system alterations.

AIMS: Systematic review and meta-analysis of neuroimaging research in chronic hepatitis C treatment naive patients, or patients previously treated without sustained viral response, to study structural and functional brain impact of hepatitis C.

METHODS: Using PRISMA guidelines a database search was conducted from inception up until 1 May 2017 for peer-reviewed studies on structural or functional neuroimaging assessment of chronic hepatitis C patients without cirrhosis or encephalopathy, with control group. Meta-analyses were performed when possible.

RESULTS: The final sample comprised 25 studies (magnetic resonance spectroscopy [N = 12], perfusion weighted imaging [N = 1], positron emission tomography [N = 3], single-photon emission computed tomography [N = 4], functional connectivity in resting state [N = 1], diffusion tensor imaging [N = 2] and structural magnetic resonance imaging [N = 2]). The whole sample was of 509 chronic hepatitis C patients, with an average age of 41.5 years old and mild liver disease. A meta-analysis of magnetic resonance spectroscopy studies showed increased levels of choline/creatine ratio (mean difference [MD] 0.12, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.06-0.18), creatine (MD 0.85, 95% CI 0.42-1.27) and glutamate…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 12 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free