Rishi Philip Mathew1, Sudhakar Kundapur Venkatesh2. 1. Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, 200, First Street SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA. 2. Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, 200, First Street SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA. venkatesh.sudhakar@mayo.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The purpose of this review is to discuss the current imaging techniques for non-invasive assessment of liver fibrosis (LF). RECENT FINDINGS: Elastography-based techniques are the most widely used imaging methods for the evaluation of LF. Currently, MR elastography (MRE) is the most accurate non-invasive method for detection and staging of LF. Ultrasound-based vibration-controlled transient elastography (VCTE) is the most widely used as it can be easily performed at the point of care but has technical limitations especially in the obese. Innovations and technical improvements continue to evolve in elastography for improving accuracy and avoiding misinterpretation from confounding factors. Other imaging methods including diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI), hepatocellular contrast-enhanced (HCE) MRI, T1 relaxometry, T1ρ imaging, textural analysis, liver surface nodularity, susceptibility-weighted imaging, and perfusion imaging are promising but need further evaluation and clinical validation. MRE is the most accurate imaging technique for assessment of LF.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The purpose of this review is to discuss the current imaging techniques for non-invasive assessment of liver fibrosis (LF). RECENT FINDINGS: Elastography-based techniques are the most widely used imaging methods for the evaluation of LF. Currently, MR elastography (MRE) is the most accurate non-invasive method for detection and staging of LF. Ultrasound-based vibration-controlled transient elastography (VCTE) is the most widely used as it can be easily performed at the point of care but has technical limitations especially in the obese. Innovations and technical improvements continue to evolve in elastography for improving accuracy and avoiding misinterpretation from confounding factors. Other imaging methods including diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI), hepatocellular contrast-enhanced (HCE) MRI, T1 relaxometry, T1ρ imaging, textural analysis, liver surface nodularity, susceptibility-weighted imaging, and perfusion imaging are promising but need further evaluation and clinical validation. MRE is the most accurate imaging technique for assessment of LF.
Entities:
Keywords:
Functional imaging; Liver fibrosis; Magnetic resonance elastography
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: Mathilde Wagner; Idoia Corcuera-Solano; Grace Lo; Steven Esses; Joseph Liao; Cecilia Besa; Nelson Chen; Ginu Abraham; Maggie Fung; James S Babb; Richard L Ehman; Bachir Taouli Journal: Radiology Date: 2017-01-03 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Richard G Barr; Giovanna Ferraioli; Mark L Palmeri; Zachary D Goodman; Guadalupe Garcia-Tsao; Jonathan Rubin; Brian Garra; Robert P Myers; Stephanie R Wilson; Deborah Rubens; Deborah Levine Journal: Radiology Date: 2015-06-16 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: J Foucher; E Chanteloup; J Vergniol; L Castéra; B Le Bail; X Adhoute; J Bertet; P Couzigou; V de Lédinghen Journal: Gut Date: 2005-07-14 Impact factor: 23.059
Authors: Michael Pavlides; Rajarshi Banerjee; Joanne Sellwood; Catherine J Kelly; Matthew D Robson; Jonathan C Booth; Jane Collier; Stefan Neubauer; Eleanor Barnes Journal: J Hepatol Date: 2015-11-10 Impact factor: 25.083
Authors: Tolga Gidener; Meng Yin; Ross A Dierkhising; Alina M Allen; Richard L Ehman; Sudhakar K Venkatesh Journal: Hepatology Date: 2021-12-15 Impact factor: 17.425