IJCS | Volume 33, Nº3, May / June 2020

230 Table 1 - Summary of the results of the studies included in this systematic review Authors Number of patients Male BNP (pg/mL) NT-proBNP (pg/mL) p-value Elastography Saito et al. 2018 105 73 - 5.175 (IQR. 2.586-11.1695) in patients with < 8.8 kPa; 5.432 (IQR. 2.338-11.527) in patients with > 8.8 kPa 0.052 (< 0.05) Low (< 8.8 kPa) - 52 patients. High (> 8.8 kPa) - 53 patients Taniguchi et al. 2018 171 116 199 (tertile 91-356) - 0.019 (< 0.05) 5.6 kPa (average). > 6.9 kPa in patients with estimated right atrial filling pressure > 7.1 mmHg Nishi et al. 2015 30 21 844 ± 806 (Standard deviation) - - 13.3 kPa. preoperative > 7.0kPa with atrial-ventricle assistance (AVD); > 12.5 kPa correlated with postoperative death Alegre et al. 2013 26 - - 1,511 versus 3,535 (CHF vs AHF at admission, respectively); decrease from 3,535 pg/ml to a median of 1,098 pg/ml at discharge (after clinical compensation) 0.025 (< 0.05) 6.5 vs 14.4 kPa (p = 0.009) in admission and 8.2 kPa in hospital discharge (p = 0.008) Hopper et al. 2012 116 61 - 4596 +- 4237 (Standard deviation) - Healthy individuals n = 55. 4.4 kPa (percentile 25 – 3.6. percentile 75- 5.1); individuals with left heart disfunction 4.7 (4.0. 8.0) kPa (p = 0.04) Stable HF 9.7 (5.0. 10.8) kPa (p < 0.001) Decompensated HF 11.2 (6.7. 14.3) kPa (p < 0.001) Lindvig et al. 2012 289 289 - - - > 8.0 kPa (48/212) cirrhosis and hepatic congestion; independent mortality predictor Colli A; 2010 27 12 - 7,114 (IQR 2,939-13,437) in admission and 4,127 (IQR 947-5955) at hospital discharge, with median decrease of 3,128(IQR 1,373-6,157) < 0.001 (< 0.05) Admission > 7.65 kPa in 14 of 24 patients and 5 (21%) more than 13.01 kPa and 14 > 7.65 kPa at hospital discharge BNP: B-type natriuretic peptide; NT-proBNP): N-terminal pro-B type natriuretic peptide; IQR: interquartile range; CHF compensated chronic heart failure; AHF acute decompensated heart failure. varied considerably among the studies and have not been reported in all studies of this review, bringing difficulty to data interpretation. There is a lack of continous parameters in the evaluation of individuals studies selected for the systematic review. Besides that, the small number of samples, reduced quantity of articles with statistical relevant power and wich relate the method to the issue of HF brings a difficulty in standardizing the assessment of the method. The studies did not compare elastography with liver biopsy, which is the gold standard for evaluation of derangement of liver architecture. However, while biopsy is an invasive method, and hence difficult to be reproduced, elastography is a non-invasive method that can be used in different liver diseases. It is worth Ávila et al. Hepatic elastography in heart failure Int J Cardiovasc Sci. 2020; 33(3):227-232 Original Article