Work

Prospective comparative diagnostic performance of quantitative ultrasound parameters for the measurement of hepatic steatosis in a biopsy-proven metabolic dysfunction associated steatotic liver disease cohort

Year: 2024

Type: article

Abstract: OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the diagnostic performance of attenuation imaging (ATI), shear wave elastography (SWE), and shear wave dispersion (SWD) for detecting and grading hepatic steatosis in patients with metabolic dysfunction associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD). METHODS: Sixty-six patients with MASLD confirmed histopathologically and 34 healthy volunteers who were age/sex-matched were prospectively enrolled in this study. ATI, SWE, and SWD examinations were performed. Fibrosis stage, necroinflammatory activity, and steatosis grade were confirmed histopathologically. Steatosis was graded as follows: S0 (<5%); S1 (5%-32%); S2 (33%-66%) to S3 (>66%). We compared the diagnostic performance of ATI, SWE, and SWD for detecting and grading hepatic steatosis. RESULTS: Both attenuation coefficient (AC) and SWD values were significantly different among the different hepatic steatosis, and both were correlated with hepatic steatosis. ATI had better diagnostic performance than SWD for detecting and grading hepatic steatosis. The area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve of ATI for detecting ≥S1, ≥S2, and =S3 were 0.917 (cut-off value of 0.69 dB/cm/MHz), 0.933 (cut-off value of 0.74 dB/cm/MHz), and 0.870 (cut-off value of 0.82 dB/cm/MHz), respectively. The area under the ROC curve of SWD value was 0.758 (cut-off value of 10.79 m/s/kHz), 0.685 (cut-off value of 12.64 m/s/kHz), and 0.722 (cut-off value of 13.24 m/s/kHz), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: ATI technology is a reliable method for detecting and grading hepatic steatosis in patients with MASLD than SWE and SWD. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: We compared the diagnostic performance of ATI, SWE, SWD for detecting and grading hepatic steatosis in patients with MASLD in order to find the best diagnostic parameters.

Source: British Journal of Radiology

DOI: 10.1093/bjr/tqae212