| Literature DB >> 31125357 |
Sosthene Somda1,2, Amandine Lebrun2,3, Hadrien Tranchart1,4, Karima Lamouri2, Sophie Prevot1,3,5, Micheline Njike-Nakseu2, Martin Gaillard1,4, Panagiotis Lainas1,4, Axel Balian2, Ibrahim Dagher1,4, Gabriel Perlemuter1,2,3, Sylvie Naveau1,2,3, Cosmin Sebastian Voican1,2,3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIM: The controlled attenuation parameter (CAP) using FibroScan (Echosens, Paris, France) M or XL probe has been developed for liver steatosis assessment. However, CAP performs poorly in patients with high body mass index. The aim of our study was to assess whether CAP is overestimated using the standard XL probe in patients with morbid obesity, and in the case of an overestimation, to reprocess the data at a greater depth to obtain the appropriate CAP (CAPa). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted an observational prospective cohort study on a total of 249 severely obese patients admitted to our institution to undergo sleeve gastrectomy. Patients had a liver biopsy performed during the surgery and a CAP measurement during the 15 days preceding biopsy. Patient files were reprocessed retrospectively by an algorithm, blinded to the patients' clinical data. The algorithm automatically assessed the probe-to-capsula distance (PCD) by analysing the echogenicity of ultrasound signals on the time-motion mode. In the case of a distance >35 mm, the algorithm automatically selected a deeper measurement for CAP (CAPa). When PCD was less than 35 mm, the measured CAP was considered as appropriated (CAPa) and no further reprocessing was performed.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31125357 PMCID: PMC6534321 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0217093
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Characteristics of the patients included in the study.
| Characteristics | n = 249 |
|---|---|
| 41.2±0.77 | |
| 43.8 ±0.4 | |
| 197 (79.1%) | |
| 54 (21.7%) | |
| 74 (29.7%) | |
| 72 (29%) | |
| 45±2.4 | |
| 31.3±1.4 | |
| 46±2.7 | |
| 6.1±0.2 | |
| 5.9±0.1 | |
| 28.2±1.2 | |
| 5.3±0.07 | |
| 1.5±0.07 | |
| 1.3±0.04 | |
| 355.8±5.4 | |
| 141.6±9.9 | |
| 12±0.6 | |
| 40.7±0.2 | |
| 97±0.3 | |
| 266±3.8 | |
| 318.7±4 | |
| 293±3.5 | |
| 39 (15.7%) | |
| 65 (26.1%) | |
| 51 (20.5%) | |
| 94 (37.7%) | |
| 107 (43%) | |
| 142 (57%) | |
| 39 (15.9) | |
| 155 (63.3%) | |
| 39 (15.9%) | |
| 11 (4.5%) | |
| 1 (0.4%) |
Note: Results are given as the mean ± standard error of the mean or %.
Abbreviations: BMI, body mass index; AST, aspartate aminotransferase; ALT, alanine aminotransferase; GGT, gamma glutamyl; HbA1c, glycated hemoglobin; HDL, high density lipoprotein; CRP, C reactive protein; CAP, controlled attenuation parameter; CAPa, appropriate controlled attenuation parameter; NAS, nonalcoholic fatty liver disease activity score; NASH, nonalcoholic steatohepatitis.
Fig 1Controlled attenuation parameter before (CAP) and after adaptation (CAPa) of measurement depth in the group of patients with probe-to-capsula distance (PCD) >35 mm.
Notched box plots showing CAP and CAPa. The line in the box indicates the median; the height of each box is the median ± (1.57 interquartile range/√n), used to assess the 95% confidence interval around group medians. Differences are considered to be significant if the shaded boxes do not overlap (p< 0.05). The horizontal lines above and below each box indicate the interquartile range (from the 25th to the 75th percentile), and the vertical lines at the ends of the box encompass the adjacent values (upper: 75th percentile + 1.5 times the interquartile range; lower: 25th percentile—1.5 times the interquartile range).
Characteristics of the patients with probe-to capsula distance (PCD) <35 mm versus >35 mm.
| Characteristics | PCD <35 mm (n = 119) | PCD >35 mm (n = 130) | p |
|---|---|---|---|
| 42.5±1 | 39.4±1.3 | NS | |
| 42.4±0.5 | 45.7±0.6 | <0.00001 | |
| 121 (82.9%) | 76 (73.8%) | NS | |
| 32 (21.9%) | 22 (21.4%) | NS | |
| 46 (31.5%) | 18 (27.2%) | NS | |
| 40 (27.6%) | 32 (31.1%) | NS | |
| 30.6±1.3 | 32.2±2.8 | NS | |
| 43.1±2 | 47.7±5 | NS | |
| 43.7±3 | 49.2±5 | NS | |
| 6±0.3 | 6.2±0.2 | NS | |
| 5.8±0.1 | 6±0.1 | NS | |
| 25.3±1.4 | 32.4±2 | <0.01 | |
| 1.5±0.1 | 1.6±0.1 | NS | |
| 339.6±6.6 | 378.7±8.6 | <0.001 | |
| 129.5±11.3 | 158.8±17.6 | NS | |
| 10.8±0.7 | 13.7±1.1 | NS | |
| 303.4±5.5 | 340.5±5.1 | <0.00001 | |
| 26 (17.8%) | 13 (12.6%) | NS | |
| 34 (23.3%) | 31 (30.1%) | NS | |
| 33 (22.6%) | 18 (17.5%) | NS | |
| 53 (36.3%) | 41 (39.8%) | NS | |
| 62 (43.8%) | 43 (41.7%) | NS | |
| 84 (56.2%) | 60 (58.3%) | NS | |
| 4 (2.8%) | 7 (7%) | NS |
Note: Results are given as the mean ± standard error of the mean or %.
Abbreviations: BMI, body mass index; AST, aspartate aminotransferase; ALT, alanine aminotransferase; GGT, gamma glutamyl; HbA1c, glycated hemoglobin; HDL, high density lipoprotein; CRP, C reactive protein; CAP, controlled attenuation parameter; NAS, nonalcoholic fatty liver disease activity score; NASH, nonalcoholic steatohepatitis.
Fig 2Distribution of appropriate controlled attenuation parameter (CAPa) according to steatosis stage.
Notched box plots showing the relationship between steatosis stage and CAPa. The line in the box indicates the median; the height of each box is the median ± (1.57 interquartile range/√n), used to assess the 95% confidence interval around group medians. Differences are considered to be significant if the shaded boxes do not overlap (p< 0.05). The horizontal lines above and below each box indicate the interquartile range (from the 25th to the 75th percentile), and the vertical lines at the ends of the box encompass the adjacent values (upper: 75th percentile + 1.5 times the interquartile range; lower: 25th percentile—1.5 times the interquartile range).
Fig 3ROC curves of appropriate controlled attenuated parameter (CAPa) for the detection of (A) steatosis (S≥1), moderate to severe steatosis (S≥2) and severe steatosis (S = 3).
The diagonal line represents detection achieved by chance alone (AUROC = 0.50); the ideal AUROC is 1.00.
Diagnostic performance of appropriate controlled attenuation parameter (CAPa) for the detection of steatosis stage.
| Steatosis | Optimal cut-off (dB/m) | Sensitivity | Specificity | PPV | NPV | LR |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S0 vs. S1-3 | 255 | 0.88 | 0.76 | 0.95 | 0.54 | 3.7 |
| S0-1 vs. S2-3 | 288 | 0.81 | 0.73 | 0.81 | 0.74 | 3 |
| S3 vs. S0-2 | 297 | 0.80 | 0.66 | 0.59 | 0.84 | 2.3 |
Abbreviations: PPV, positive predictive value; NPV, negative predictive value; LR, likelihood ratio.