Literature DB >> 24366108

Comparison of interobserver agreement of magnetic resonance elastography with histopathological staging of liver fibrosis.

Jurgen H Runge1, Anneloes E Bohte, Joanne Verheij, Valeska Terpstra, Aart J Nederveen, Karin M J van Nieuwkerk, Rob J de Knegt, Bert C Baak, Peter L M Jansen, Ralph Sinkus, Jaap Stoker.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: MR elastography (MRE) can serve as an accurate surrogate marker of liver fibrosis. For any diagnostic test that is to replace the current reference standard, interobserver agreement should be at least as good and preferably better. The objective of this study was to perform a head-to-head comparison of the interobserver agreements of MRE and liver fibrosis staging on biopsy in a single cohort of hepatitis patients.
METHODS: One hundred and three patients with viral hepatitis B or C who had a liver biopsy underwent MRE. Two readers independently selected a region-of-interest (ROI) in the liver to derive elasticity values. Two pathologists first independently staged fibrosis on biopsies using the METAVIR classification and subsequently held a consensus meeting. Interobserver agreements of elasticity values and fibrosis stages were assessed with intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC).
RESULTS: MRE and biopsy data were available for 85/103 patients. ICC of pathologists staging fibrosis was almost perfect at 0.91 (95% CI 0.86-0.94). ICC for MRE readers was significantly (P < 0.0001) higher at 0.99 (95% CI 0.98-1.00).
CONCLUSIONS: Interobserver agreement for liver fibrosis staging was almost perfect for both histopathology and MRE, with a significant higher agreement for MRE. Its high interobserver agreement and reliable accuracy support the use of MRE as a non-invasive screening tool for liver fibrosis.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24366108     DOI: 10.1007/s00261-013-0063-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Abdom Imaging        ISSN: 0942-8925


  20 in total

1.  Clinical Utility of an Increase in Magnetic Resonance Elastography in Predicting Fibrosis Progression in Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease.

Authors:  Veeral H Ajmera; Amy Liu; Seema Singh; Georg Yachoa; Matthew Ramey; Meera Bhargava; Ava Zamani; Scarlett Lopez; Neeraj Mangla; Ricki Bettencourt; Emily Rizo; Mark Valasek; Cynthia Behling; Lisa Richards; Claude Sirlin; Rohit Loomba
Journal:  Hepatology       Date:  2020-01-27       Impact factor: 17.425

2.  Diagnostic value of spleen stiffness by magnetic resonance elastography for prediction of esophageal varices in cirrhotic patients.

Authors:  Zih-En Jhang; Kuan-Lin Wu; Chia-Bang Chen; Yao-Li Chen; Ping-Yi Lin; Chen-Te Chou
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2020-07-16

Review 3.  Magnetic resonance imaging and transient elastography in the management of Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease (NAFLD).

Authors:  Ma Ai Thanda Han; Rola Saouaf; Walid Ayoub; Tsuyoshi Todo; Edward Mena; Mazen Noureddin
Journal:  Expert Rev Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2017-03-09       Impact factor: 5.045

4.  Magnetic Resonance Elastography of the Liver: Qualitative and Quantitative Comparison of Gradient Echo and Spin Echo Echoplanar Imaging Sequences.

Authors:  Mathilde Wagner; Cecilia Besa; Jad Bou Ayache; Temel Kaya Yasar; Octavia Bane; Maggie Fung; Richard L Ehman; Bachir Taouli
Journal:  Invest Radiol       Date:  2016-09       Impact factor: 6.016

5.  Magnetic resonance elastography measured shear stiffness as a biomarker of fibrosis in pediatric nonalcoholic fatty liver disease.

Authors:  Jeffrey B Schwimmer; Cynthia Behling; Jorge Eduardo Angeles; Melissa Paiz; Janis Durelle; Jonathan Africa; Kimberly P Newton; Elizabeth M Brunt; Joel E Lavine; Stephanie H Abrams; Prakash Masand; Rajesh Krishnamurthy; Kelvin Wong; Richard L Ehman; Meng Yin; Kevin J Glaser; Bogdan Dzyubak; Tanya Wolfson; Anthony C Gamst; Jonathan Hooker; William Haufe; Alexandra Schlein; Gavin Hamilton; Michael S Middleton; Claude B Sirlin
Journal:  Hepatology       Date:  2017-10-09       Impact factor: 17.425

6.  Use of magnetic resonance elastography for assessing liver functional reserve: A clinical study.

Authors:  Bin Li; Jie Min; Wei-Ren Liang; Guang-Qiang Zhang; Jian-Jun Wu; Kai Jin; Wei Huang; Cai-Yu Ying; Ming Chao
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2015-06-28       Impact factor: 5.742

Review 7.  Clinical applications, limitations and future role of transient elastography in the management of liver disease.

Authors:  Pik Eu Chang; George Boon-Bee Goh; Jing Hieng Ngu; Hiang Keat Tan; Chee Kiat Tan
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2016-02-06

8.  Simultaneous measurement of hepatic and splenic stiffness using MR elastography: preliminary experience.

Authors:  Hadrien A Dyvorne; Guido H Jajamovich; Cecilia Besa; Nancy Cooper; Bachir Taouli
Journal:  Abdom Imaging       Date:  2015-04

Review 9.  Magnetic resonance elastography of abdomen.

Authors:  Sudhakar Kundapur Venkatesh; Richard L Ehman
Journal:  Abdom Imaging       Date:  2015-04

10.  Comparison of spin-echo echoplanar imaging and gradient recalled echo-based MR elastography at 3 Tesla with and without gadoxetic acid administration.

Authors:  Yong Seek Kim; Ji Soo Song; Stephan Kannengiesser; Seung Young Seo
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2017-03-13       Impact factor: 5.315

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.