Literature DB >> 17641368

Unenhanced CT for assessment of macrovesicular hepatic steatosis in living liver donors: comparison of visual grading with liver attenuation index.

Sang Won Lee1, Seong Ho Park, Kyoung Won Kim, Eugene K Choi, Yong Moon Shin, Pyo Nyun Kim, Kyoung Ho Lee, Eun Sil Yu, Shin Hwang, Sung-Gyu Lee.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To retrospectively compare the accuracy of visual grading and the liver attenuation index in the computed tomographic (CT) diagnosis of 30% or higher macrovesicular steatosis in living hepatic donors, by using histologic analysis as the reference standard.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Institutional review board approval was obtained with waiver of informed consent. Of 703 consecutive hepatic donor candidates, 24 patients (22 men and two women; mean age +/- standard deviation, 36.3 years +/- 9.7) who had 30% or higher macrovesicular steatosis at histologic analysis and same-day CT with subsequent needle biopsy in the right hepatic lobe (at least two samples per patient) were evaluated. An age- and sex-matched control group of 24 subjects included those who had less than 30% macrovesicular steatosis but otherwise met the same criteria as the patient group. A diagnostically difficult setting was made by selecting those with the highest degree of macrovesicular steatosis when there were multiple control subjects matched for a particular subject in the patient group. Two independent radiologists assessed steatosis of the right hepatic lobe by using two methods: a five-point visual grading system that used attenuation comparison between the liver and hepatic vessels and the liver attenuation index (CT(L-S)), defined as hepatic attenuation minus splenic attenuation and calculated with region of interest measurements of hepatic attenuation. Interobserver agreement was assessed. Accuracy in the diagnosis of 30% or higher macrovesicular steatosis was compared by using a multireader, multicase receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis.
RESULTS: For visual grading, kappa = 0.905 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.834, 0.976). Intraclass correlation coefficient for CT(L-S) was 0.962 (95% CI: 0.893, 0.983). The area under the ROC curve of visual grading and CT(L-S) were 0.927 (95% CI: 0.822, 1) and 0.929 (95% CI: 0.874, 0.983), respectively, indicating no statistically significant difference (P = .975).
CONCLUSION: Both visual grading and CT(L-S) are highly reliable and similarly accurate in the diagnosis of 30% or higher macrovesicular steatosis in living hepatic donor candidates.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17641368     DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2442061177

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  48 in total

Review 1.  Quantitative Assessment of Liver Fat with Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Spectroscopy.

Authors:  Scott B Reeder; Irene Cruite; Gavin Hamilton; Claude B Sirlin
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2011-09-16       Impact factor: 4.813

2.  Acoustic radiation force impulse elastography of the liver: can fat deposition in the liver affect the measurement of liver stiffness?

Authors:  Utaroh Motosugi; Tomoaki Ichikawa; Yoshibumi Niitsuma; Tsutomu Araki
Journal:  Jpn J Radiol       Date:  2011-09-29       Impact factor: 2.374

Review 3.  Quantification of liver fat with magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Scott B Reeder; Claude B Sirlin
Journal:  Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am       Date:  2010-08       Impact factor: 2.266

4.  Hepatic fat quantification magnetic resonance for monitoring treatment response in pediatric nonalcoholic steatohepatitis.

Authors:  Hong Koh; Seung Kim; Myung-Joon Kim; Hyun Gi Kim; Hyun Joo Shin; Mi-Jung Lee
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2015-09-07       Impact factor: 5.742

5.  Differentiation between true focal liver lesions and pseudolesions in patients with fatty liver: evaluation of helical CT criteria.

Authors:  Philippe Soyer; Marc Sirol; Yann Fargeaudou; Florent Duchat; Lounis Hamzi; Mourad Boudiaf; Mounir Aout; Youcef Guerrache; Eric Vicaut; Roland Rymer
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2010-01-19       Impact factor: 5.315

6.  Preoperative assessment of the risk factors that help to predict the prognosis after living donor liver transplantation.

Authors:  Ryuichi Yoshida; Takayuki Iwamoto; Takahito Yagi; Daisuke Sato; Yuzo Umeda; Kenji Mizuno; Susumu Shinoura; Hiroyoshi Matsukawa; Hiroaki Matsuda; Hiroshi Sadamori; Noriaki Tanaka
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2008-11       Impact factor: 3.352

Review 7.  The effects of cancer chemotherapy on liver imaging.

Authors:  Philip J A Robinson
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2009-02-24       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 8.  Liver fat imaging-a clinical overview of ultrasound, CT, and MR imaging.

Authors:  Yingzhen N Zhang; Kathryn J Fowler; Gavin Hamilton; Jennifer Y Cui; Ethan Z Sy; Michelle Balanay; Jonathan C Hooker; Nikolaus Szeverenyi; Claude B Sirlin
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2018-06-06       Impact factor: 3.039

Review 9.  Importance of imaging and recent developments in diagnosis of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease.

Authors:  Mustafa Koplay; Mesut Sivri; Hasan Erdogan; Alaaddin Nayman
Journal:  World J Hepatol       Date:  2015-04-18

10.  Assessment of liver fat in an obese patient population using noncontrast CT fat percent index.

Authors:  Ali F Jon; Ahmad R Cheema; Atif N Khan; Vassilios Raptopoulos; Thomas Hauser; Imad Nasser; Francine K Welty; Andrew Karellas; Melvin E Clouse
Journal:  Clin Imaging       Date:  2014-01-17       Impact factor: 1.605

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.