Gamma GT result

[Winnie73]

Hi, just after advice/opinion on reliability of GGT test. Anyone offer some input? My result was 15 which I assume is great.?

Thanks in advance

[Kristian]

Results will vary between labs so what your result means will depend on where your tests were done. If you do a search for "GGT Reference Range" plenty of results will come up. You can also find out what its used for by doing a similar search. Labtests on line is a relatively useful resource for that, but I'm sure there are plenty of others. Labtests on line wont give you any references ranges though for the reasons set out above. The search results should only act as a guide, you'll need to ask your doc what the normal range is for your particular lab if you are still concerned.

When I've done it the upper limit of normal can be anywhere between 40 and 60. But your lab may be different, so if you're still concerned you'll need to check with your own doc. None of us here are professionally qualified to tell you what your individual result means for you. From my experience the result of my last ggt test was similar to yours and I've got a nice shiny new very healthy liver. Whether yours is the same I couldn't comment.

Hope thats a little helpful.

[Winnie73 in reply to Kristian]

Thank you. Fantastic that you are well and have a new healthy liver. Amazing! My lab result gave a normal range of 0-33 so 15 was mid range. I suppose my query is to do with reading several posts where people say they still had liver disease even with normal blood results. I'm seeing a gastro on 30 Nov about some unexplained itching so I can discuss my results when I see him. Thank you for replying. ☺️

[Kristian in reply to Winnie73]

I have seen and read that too, so it is possible. After all, if my understanding is correct, most of the initial tests that are done show whether there is something currently causing or has very recently caused some injury to the liver. So a liver could have been damaged in the past, but as there is no recent injury, the usual markers of active liver damage could appear normal. It is therefore feasible to have liver disease, but if its not active at the time of the test, then it may not show.

There is also the other end of the spectrum where someone has had cirrhosis for quite some time and the amount of scarring that has taken place has reduced the number of healthy cells left to damage. As a result, the enzymes that are produced by any further ongoing liver damage are also much reduced. The liver may, by that stage, have gone from being larger than normal to smaller than normal. I do though suspect anyone who had progressed to that stage would have been seriously unwell for some time.