Literature DB >> 31278577

Prospective comparison of transient, point shear wave, and magnetic resonance elastography for staging liver fibrosis.

Thierry Lefebvre1,2,3, Claire Wartelle-Bladou4, Philip Wong5, Giada Sebastiani5, Jeanne-Marie Giard2,4, Hélène Castel2,4, Jessica Murphy-Lavallée1, Damien Olivié1, André Ilinca1,2, Marie-Pierre Sylvestre2,6, Guillaume Gilbert1,7, Zu-Hua Gao8, Bich N Nguyen9, Guy Cloutier1,10,11, An Tang12,13,14.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To perform head-to-head comparisons of the feasibility and diagnostic performance of transient elastography (TE), point shear-wave elastography (pSWE), and magnetic resonance elastography (MRE).
METHODS: This prospective, cross-sectional, dual-center imaging study included 100 patients with known or suspected chronic liver disease caused by hepatitis B or C virus, nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, or autoimmune hepatitis identified between 2014 and 2018. Liver stiffness measured with the three elastographic techniques was obtained within 6 weeks of a liver biopsy. Confounding effects of inflammation and steatosis on association between fibrosis and liver stiffness were assessed. Obuchowski scores and AUCs for staging fibrosis were evaluated and the latter were compared using the DeLong method.
RESULTS: TE, pSWE, and MRE were technically feasible and reliable in 92%, 79%, and 91% subjects, respectively. At univariate analysis, liver stiffness measured by all techniques increased with fibrosis stages and inflammation and decreased with steatosis. For classification of dichotomized fibrosis stages, the AUCs were significantly higher for distinguishing stages F0 vs. ≥ F1 with MRE than with TE (0.88 vs. 0.71; p < 0.05) or pSWE (0.88 vs. 0.73; p < 0.05), and for distinguishing stages ≤ F1 vs. ≥ F2 with MRE than with TE (0.85 vs. 0.75; p < 0.05). TE, pSWE, and MRE Obuchowski scores for staging fibrosis stages were respectively 0.89 (95% CI 0.85-0.93), 0.90 (95% CI 0.85-0.94), and 0.94 (95% CI 0.91-0.96).
CONCLUSION: MRE provided a higher diagnostic performance than TE and pSWE for staging early stages of liver fibrosis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02044523 KEY POINTS: • The technical failure rate was similar between MRE and US-based elastography techniques. • Liver stiffness measured by MRE and US-based elastography techniques increased with fibrosis stages and inflammation and decreased with steatosis. • MRE provided a diagnostic accuracy higher than US-based elastography techniques for staging of early stages of histology-determined liver fibrosis.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Classification; Elasticity imaging techniques; Fibrosis; Liver; Prospective studies

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31278577     DOI: 10.1007/s00330-019-06331-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Radiol        ISSN: 0938-7994            Impact factor:   5.315


  57 in total

Review 1.  Quantitative Elastography Methods in Liver Disease: Current Evidence and Future Directions.

Authors:  Paul Kennedy; Mathilde Wagner; Laurent Castéra; Cheng William Hong; Curtis L Johnson; Claude B Sirlin; Bachir Taouli
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2018-03       Impact factor: 11.105

2.  Non-invasive evaluation of liver fibrosis: a comparison of ultrasound-based transient elastography and MR elastography in patients with viral hepatitis B and C.

Authors:  Anneloes E Bohte; Annikki de Niet; Louis Jansen; Shandra Bipat; Aart J Nederveen; Joanne Verheij; Valeska Terpstra; Ralph Sinkus; Karin M J van Nieuwkerk; Rob J de Knegt; Bert C Baak; Peter L M Jansen; Henk W Reesink; Jaap Stoker
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2013-10-25       Impact factor: 5.315

3.  Determination of reliability criteria for liver stiffness evaluation by transient elastography.

Authors:  Jérôme Boursier; Jean-Pierre Zarski; Victor de Ledinghen; Marie-Christine Rousselet; Nathalie Sturm; Brigitte Lebail; Isabelle Fouchard-Hubert; Yves Gallois; Frédéric Oberti; Sandrine Bertrais; Paul Calès
Journal:  Hepatology       Date:  2013-02-04       Impact factor: 17.425

4.  Distinguishing between Hepatic Inflammation and Fibrosis with MR Elastography.

Authors:  Meng Yin; Kevin J Glaser; Armando Manduca; Taofic Mounajjed; Harmeet Malhi; Douglas A Simonetto; Ruisi Wang; Liu Yang; Shennen A Mao; Jaime M Glorioso; Faysal M Elgilani; Christopher J Ward; Peter C Harris; Scott L Nyberg; Vijay H Shah; Richard L Ehman
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2017-01-27       Impact factor: 11.105

5.  Three-Tesla magnetic resonance elastography for hepatic fibrosis: comparison with diffusion-weighted imaging and gadoxetic acid-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Hee Sun Park; Young Jun Kim; Mi Hye Yu; Won Hyeok Choe; Sung Il Jung; Hae Jeong Jeon
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2014-12-14       Impact factor: 5.742

6.  Prospective comparison of magnetic resonance imaging to transient elastography and serum markers for liver fibrosis detection.

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

7.  The influence of hepatic steatosis on the evaluation of fibrosis with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease by acoustic radiation force impulse.

Authors: 
Journal:  Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc       Date:  2017-07

8.  Prognostic Role of Liver Stiffness Measurements Using Magnetic Resonance Elastography in Patients with Compensated Chronic Liver Disease.

Authors:  Dong Ho Lee; Jeong Min Lee; Won Chang; Jung-Hwan Yoon; Yoon Jun Kim; Jeong-Hoon Lee; Su Jong Yu; Joon Koo Han
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2018-02-27       Impact factor: 5.315

9.  Detection of Steatohepatitis in a Rat Model by Using Spectroscopic Shear-Wave US Elastography.

Authors:  Siavash Kazemirad; Eric Zhang; Bich N Nguyen; Paule Bodson-Clermont; François Destrempes; Dominique Trudel; Guy Cloutier; An Tang
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2016-08-11       Impact factor: 11.105

10.  Liver MR Elastography at 3 T: Agreement Across Pulse Sequences and Effect of Liver R2* on Image Quality.

Authors:  Ely R Felker; Kang-Sun Choi; Kyung Sung; Holden H Wu; Steven S Raman; Bradley D Bolster; Stephan Kannengiesser; Kari Sorge; David S K Lu
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2018-07-11       Impact factor: 3.959

View more
  21 in total

1.  Predicting the stages of liver fibrosis with multiphase CT radiomics based on volumetric features.

Authors:  Enming Cui; Wansheng Long; Juanhua Wu; Qing Li; Changyi Ma; Yi Lei; Fan Lin
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2021-03-22

2.  Two-dimensional (2D) dynamic vibration optical coherence elastography (DV-OCE) for evaluating mechanical properties: a potential application in tissue engineering.

Authors:  Hsiao-Chuan Liu; Piotr Kijanka; Matthew W Urban
Journal:  Biomed Opt Express       Date:  2021-02-03       Impact factor: 3.732

3.  Magnetic resonance elastography for prediction of long-term progression and outcome in chronic liver disease: A retrospective study.

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

4.  Risk of liver fibrosis in patients with prediabetes and diabetes mellitus.

Authors:  Jongsin Park; Heon-Ju Kwon; Won Sohn; Ju-Yeon Cho; Soo Jin Park; Yoosoo Chang; Seungho Ryu; Byung Ik Kim; Yong Kyun Cho
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-06-02       Impact factor: 3.752

5.  Comparison of point shear wave elastography and transient elastography in the evaluation of patients with NAFLD.

Authors:  Giulio Argalia; Claudio Ventura; Niccolò Tosi; Daniele Campioni; Corrado Tagliati; Marianna Tufillaro; Monica Cucco; Gianluca Svegliati Baroni; Andrea Giovagnoni
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2022-03-15       Impact factor: 6.313

Review 6.  Conventional and artificial intelligence-based imaging for biomarker discovery in chronic liver disease.

Authors:  Jérémy Dana; Aïna Venkatasamy; Antonio Saviano; Joachim Lupberger; Yujin Hoshida; Valérie Vilgrain; Pierre Nahon; Caroline Reinhold; Benoit Gallix; Thomas F Baumert
Journal:  Hepatol Int       Date:  2022-02-09       Impact factor: 9.029

7.  The current value of quantitative shear wave sonoelastography in parotid gland tumors.

Authors:  Vivian Thimsen; Miguel Goncalves; Michael Koch; Konstantinos Mantsopoulos; Joachim Hornung; Heinrich Iro; Mirco Schapher
Journal:  Gland Surg       Date:  2021-04

8.  An Acoustic Emission Method for Assessing the Degree of Degradation of Mechanical Properties and Residual Life of Metal Structures under Complex Dynamic Deformation Stresses.

Authors:  Petr Louda; Artem Sharko; Dmitry Stepanchikov
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2021-04-21       Impact factor: 3.623

9.  Magnetic resonance elastography to quantify liver disease severity in autosomal recessive polycystic kidney disease.

Authors:  Erum A Hartung; Juan S Calle-Toro; Carolina Maya Lopera; Jessica Wen; Robert H Carson; Mohini Dutt; Kathryn Howarth; Susan L Furth; Kassa Darge; Suraj D Serai
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2020-08-05

10.  Using MR elastography to assess portal hypertension and response to beta-blockers in patients with cirrhosis.

Authors:  Karen Vagner Danielsen; Jens Dahlgaard Hove; Puria Nabilou; Meng Yin; Jun Chen; Mirabella Zhao; Thomas Kallemose; Ane Søgaard Teisner; Hartwig Roman Siebner; Richard L Ehman; Søren Møller; Flemming Bendtsen
Journal:  Liver Int       Date:  2021-06-16       Impact factor: 8.754

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.