PURPOSE: To cross-validate two recent noninvasive elastographic techniques, ultrasound-based transient elastography (UTE) and magnetic resonance elastography (MRE). As potential alternatives to liver biopsy, UTE and MRE are undergoing clinical investigations for liver fibrosis diagnosis and liver disease management around the world. These two techniques use tissue stiffness as a marker for disease state and it is important to do a cross-validation study of both elastographic techniques to determine the consistency with which the two techniques can measure the mechanical properties of materials. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this study, 19 well-characterized phantoms with a range of stiffness values were measured by two clinical devices (a Fibroscan and an MRE system based respectively on the UTE and MRE techniques) successively with the operators double-blinded. RESULTS: Statistical analysis showed that the correlation coefficient was r(2) = 0.93 between MRE and UTE, and there was no evidence of a systematic difference between them within the range of stiffnesses examined. CONCLUSION: These two noninvasive methods, MRE and UTE, provide clinicians with important new options for improving patient care regarding liver diseases in terms of the diagnosis, prognosis, and monitoring of fibrosis progression, as well for evaluating the efficacy of treatment.
PURPOSE: To cross-validate two recent noninvasive elastographic techniques, ultrasound-based transient elastography (UTE) and magnetic resonance elastography (MRE). As potential alternatives to liver biopsy, UTE and MRE are undergoing clinical investigations for liver fibrosis diagnosis and liver disease management around the world. These two techniques use tissue stiffness as a marker for disease state and it is important to do a cross-validation study of both elastographic techniques to determine the consistency with which the two techniques can measure the mechanical properties of materials. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this study, 19 well-characterized phantoms with a range of stiffness values were measured by two clinical devices (a Fibroscan and an MRE system based respectively on the UTE and MRE techniques) successively with the operators double-blinded. RESULTS: Statistical analysis showed that the correlation coefficient was r(2) = 0.93 between MRE and UTE, and there was no evidence of a systematic difference between them within the range of stiffnesses examined. CONCLUSION: These two noninvasive methods, MRE and UTE, provide clinicians with important new options for improving patient care regarding liver diseases in terms of the diagnosis, prognosis, and monitoring of fibrosis progression, as well for evaluating the efficacy of treatment.
Authors: Laurent Huwart; Christine Sempoux; Eric Vicaut; Najat Salameh; Laurence Annet; Etienne Danse; Frank Peeters; Leon C ter Beek; Jacques Rahier; Ralph Sinkus; Yves Horsmans; Bernard E Van Beers Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2008-04-04 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: Jayant A Talwalkar; David M Kurtz; Scott J Schoenleber; Colin P West; Victor M Montori Journal: Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol Date: 2007-10 Impact factor: 11.382
Authors: Meng Yin; Jayant A Talwalkar; Kevin J Glaser; Armando Manduca; Roger C Grimm; Phillip J Rossman; Jeff L Fidler; Richard L Ehman Journal: Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol Date: 2007-10 Impact factor: 11.382
Authors: Laurent Huwart; Christine Sempoux; Najat Salameh; Jacques Jamart; Laurence Annet; Ralph Sinkus; Frank Peeters; Leon C ter Beek; Yves Horsmans; Bernard E Van Beers Journal: Radiology Date: 2007-11 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Gwladys E Leclerc; Laëtitia Debernard; Félix Foucart; Ludovic Robert; Kay M Pelletier; Fabrice Charleux; Richard Ehman; Marie-Christine Ho Ba Tho; Sabine F Bensamoun Journal: J Biomech Date: 2012-01-28 Impact factor: 2.712
Authors: Heng Zhao; Jun Chen; Duane D Meixner; Hua Xie; Vijay Shamdasani; Shiwei Zhou; Jean-Luc Robert; Matthew W Urban; William Sanchez; Matthew R Callstrom; Richard L Ehman; James F Greenleaf; Shigao Chen Journal: J Ultrasound Med Date: 2014-09 Impact factor: 2.153
Authors: Matthew B McCullough; Zachary J Domire; Ann M Reed; Shreyasee Amin; Steven R Ytterberg; Qingshan Chen; Kai-Nan An Journal: Muscle Nerve Date: 2011-02-11 Impact factor: 3.217
Authors: Carolina Amador; Matthew W Urban; Shigao Chen; Qingshan Chen; Kai-Nan An; James F Greenleaf Journal: IEEE Trans Biomed Eng Date: 2011-02-10 Impact factor: 4.538
Authors: Hadrien A Dyvorne; Guido H Jajamovich; Octavia Bane; M Isabel Fiel; Hsin Chou; Thomas D Schiano; Douglas Dieterich; James S Babb; Scott L Friedman; Bachir Taouli Journal: Liver Int Date: 2016-02-07 Impact factor: 5.828
Authors: Ahmed A Harouni; Ahmed M Gharib; Nael F Osman; Caryn Morse; Theo Heller; Khaled Z Abd-Elmoniem Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2014-07-31 Impact factor: 4.668