Literature DB >> 26844364

Liver Fibrosis Staging with MR Elastography: Comparison of Diagnostic Performance between Patients with Chronic Hepatitis B and Those with Other Etiologic Causes.

Won Chang1, Jeong Min Lee1, Jeong Hee Yoon1, Joon Koo Han1, Byung Ihn Choi1, Jung Hwan Yoon1, Kyoung Bun Lee1, Kwang-Woong Lee1, Nam-Joon Yi1, Kyung-Suk Suh1.   

Abstract

Purpose To evaluate the diagnostic performance of magnetic resonance (MR) elastography in staging liver fibrosis in patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB) and other etiologic causes. Materials and Methods This retrospective study was institutional review board-approved and the requirement for informed consent was waived. Before surgery, MR elastographic imaging was performed in 352 patients with chronic liver diseases (281 patients with CHB, 71 patients without CHB) and hepatocellular carcinomas and 64 living liver donor candidates. Liver stiffness (LS) values were measured on quantitative shear-stiffness maps of MR elastography, and the diagnostic performance of MR elastography in staging liver fibrosis was evaluated by using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis and the Obuchowski measure with the histopathologic analysis of liver fibrosis in the CHB group and in the group composed of other etiologic causes. In 120 patients (97 with CHB, 23 without CHB) and 51 donors, diagnostic performance of MR elastography was validated. Results Areas under the curve of LS values for the diagnosis of significant fibrosis (≥stage F2), severe fibrosis (≥stage F3), and cirrhosis (stage F4) in the CHB group were 0.972 (95% confidence interval: 0.948, 0.987), 0.946 (95% confidence interval: 0.916, 0.968), and 0.920 (95% confidence interval: 0.885, 0.947), respectively. Obuchowski measures were similarly high in the CHB group and in the group composed of other etiologic causes (0.970 vs 0.977). However, the estimated cutoff value for stage F4 in the group with CHB was substantially lower than in the participants with other etiologic causes: 3.67 kPa versus 4.65 kPa. In the validation study for stage F1 or greater, stage F2 or greater, stage F3 or greater, and stage F4, the Youden indexes were 0.807, 0.842, 0.806, and 0.639, respectively, in the group with CHB, and 0.783, 0.900, 1.000, and 0.917, respectively, in the group without CHB. Conclusion The diagnostic performance of MR elastography in liver fibrosis staging was similarly high in the groups with and without CHB, but the cutoff LS values for diagnosing liver cirrhosis differed between the groups with and without CHB. (©) RSNA, 2016 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26844364     DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2016150397

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


  27 in total

Review 1.  KASL clinical practice guidelines for management of chronic hepatitis B.

Authors: 
Journal:  Clin Mol Hepatol       Date:  2019-06-12

2.  Comparison of diffusion-weighted imaging and MR elastography in staging liver fibrosis: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Weon Jang; Seongil Jo; Ji Soo Song; Hong Pil Hwang; Seong-Hun Kim
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2021-03-26

3.  Comparison between ROI-based and volumetric measurements in quantifying heterogeneity of liver stiffness using MR elastography.

Authors:  Roya Rezvani Habibabadi; Pegah Khoshpouri; Maryam Ghadimi; Mohammadreza Shaghaghi; Sanaz Ameli; Bita Hazhirkarzar; Pallavi Pandey; Mounes Aliyari Ghasabeh; Ankur Pandey; Ihab R Kamel
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2019-11-08       Impact factor: 5.315

4.  Imaging brain function with simultaneous BOLD and viscoelasticity contrast: fMRI/fMRE.

Authors:  Patricia S Lan; Kevin J Glaser; Richard L Ehman; Gary H Glover
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2020-02-01       Impact factor: 6.556

Review 5.  MR elastography of liver: current status and future perspectives.

Authors:  Ilkay S Idilman; Jiahui Li; Meng Yin; Sudhakar K Venkatesh
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2020-07-23

Review 6.  Comparison of gradient-recalled echo and spin-echo echo-planar imaging MR elastography in staging liver fibrosis: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Yong Seek Kim; Yu Na Jang; Ji Soo Song
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2017-11-21       Impact factor: 5.315

7.  Feasibility and agreement of stiffness measurements using gradient-echo and spin-echo MR elastography sequences in unselected patients undergoing liver MRI.

Authors:  Guilherme Moura Cunha; Kevin J Glaser; Anke Bergman; Rodrigo P Luz; Eduardo H de Figueiredo; Flavia Paiva Proença Lobo Lopes
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2018-05-17       Impact factor: 3.039

8.  Magnetic resonance elastography SE-EPI vs GRE sequences at 3T in a pediatric population with liver disease.

Authors:  Juan S Calle-Toro; Suraj D Serai; Erum A Hartung; David J Goldberg; Bradley D Bolster; Kassa Darge; Sudha A Anupindi
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2019-03

Review 9.  Magnetic Resonance Elastography of Liver: Current Update.

Authors:  Safa Hoodeshenas; Meng Yin; Sudhakar Kundapur Venkatesh
Journal:  Top Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2018-10

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.