Year 2023 / Volume 115 / Number 4
Original
Liver stiffness accuracy by magnetic resonance elastography in histologically proven non-alcoholic fatty liver disease patients: a Spanish cohort

162-167

DOI: 10.17235/reed.2022.8777/2022

Carmen Lara Romero, Jia-Xu Liang, Isabel Fernández Lizaranzazu, Javier Ampuero Herrojo, Javier Castell, Carmen del Prado Alba, Inmaculada Domínguez Pascual, Manuel Romero Gómez,

Abstract
Objectives: to evaluate the performance of magnetic resonance elastography (MRE) to stage liver fibrosis in patients with histologically confirmed nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and to assess the impact of potential confounding factors in MRE diagnostic accuracy. The secondary objective was to compare MRE with other non-invasive methods for staging fibrosis such as transient elastography (TE) and non-invasive scores (APRI and FIB-4). Methods: sixty-five histologically confirmed NAFLD patients were prospectively enrolled at the Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocío (Seville, Spain). Liver stiffness was measured by MRE, TE and non-invasive scores (APRI and FIB-4). Fibrosis was assessed by liver biopsy using the steatosis, activity and fibrosis (SAF) score. Patients were classified into three groups according to the consistency between MRE and histopathological findings: underestimation, concordance and overestimation groups. Areas under the ROC curve (AUROC) and diagnostic performance were evaluated. Results: the area under the ROC curve (AUROC) of MRE in advanced fibrosis (≥ F3) was 0.90 (0.82-0.97), while TE AUROC was 0.82 (0.72-0.93) (p = 0.22) and lower for the non-invasive test (FIB-4 0.67 and APRI 0.62). Inflammatory activity, steatosis grade and higher levels of liver biochemistry appeared to overestimate MRE results in the univariate analysis, but only gamma-glutamyl transferase (GGT) was statistically significant in the multivariate analysis (p < 0.01). Age, sex, body mass index (BMI), weight, diabetes mellitus (DM), high blood pressure (HBP), platelets or lipidic profile did not affect MRE accuracy. Conclusions: MRE is an effective and non-invasive method for detecting and staging liver fibrosis in NAFLD patients. MRE is more accurate than TE and allows the study of liver anatomy. Histological inflammation and surrogate biomarkers of inflammation can overestimate liver stiffness, but only GGT was statistically significant in the multivariate analysis. Important features of NAFLD patients such as obesity, DM, or lipidic profile did not affect MRE accuracy.
Share Button
New comment
Comments

17/04/2023 23:55:05
RECOVERY OF LOST FUNDS FROM SCAMMER.

Tracking Down Lost Bitcoins and Other Cryptos: Fast without wasting time Contact: Telegram: https://t.me/WizardWebRecovery / Email: wizardwebrecovery@gmail.com, Do you need support of recovery of your lost or stolen bitcoin, trying to obtain cryptocurrency transferred to the wrong wallet address, or believe your wallet has been compromised, get in touch with Wizard Web Recovery Group Hackers . I lost over 412,040 $ after participating in a SINCODE binary scam. The money I fraudulently lost has been recovered thanks to the super work of Wizard Web Recovery Group Hackers . They Working with the new digital software that recovers funds without a twinkle of eyes beep Wizard Web Recovery Group Hackers is trustworthy you can always contact them via
Telegram: https://t.me/WizardWebRecovery
Email: wizardwebrecovery@gmail.com


References
Younossi, Z. M. , Koenig, A. B. , D Abdelatif, Fazel, Y. , et al. Global epidemiology of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease—meta‐analytic assessment of prevalence, incidence, and outcomes. Hepatology, 2016; 64(1).
.Angulo P, Kleiner DE, Dam-Larsen S, et al. Liver Fibrosis, but No Other Histologic Features, Is Associated With Long-term Outcomes of Patients With Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease. Gastroenterology. 2015;149(2):389–97.e10 Epub 2015/05/04. [PubMed: 25935633]
3.Ekstedt M, Hagstrom H, Nasr P, et al. Fibrosis stage is the strongest predictor for disease-specific mortality in NAFLD after up to 33 years of follow-up. Hepatology. 2015;61(5):1547–54. Epub 2014/08/16. [PubMed: 25125077]
4.Dulai PS, Singh S, Patel J, et al. Increased risk of mortality by fibrosis stage in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Hepatology. 2017;65(5):1557–65. [PubMed: 28130788]
5.Castera L. Noninvasive methods to assess liver disease in patients with hepatitis B or C. Gastroenterology. 2012; 142:1293–1302. [PubMed: 22537436]
6.Venkatesh SK, Yin M, Ehman RL. Magnetic resonance elastography of liver: technique, analysis, and clinical applications. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2013;37(3):544–55.
7.Yin M, Glaser KJ, Talwalkar JA, et al. Hepatic MR Elastography: Clinical Performance in a Series of 1377 Consecutive Examinations. Radiology. 2016;278(1):114–24.
8.Chen J, Yin M, Talwalkar JA, et al. Diagnostic Performance of MR Elastography and Vibration controlled Transient Elastography in the Detection of Hepatic Fibrosis in Patients with Severe to Morbid Obesity. Radiology. 2017;283(2):418–28.
9.Sanyal AJ. Past, present and future perspectives in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 2019; 16: 377–86
10.Trout, Andrew, T, et al. Diagnostic Performance of MR Elastography for Liver Fibrosis in Children and Young Adults with a Spectrum of Liver Diseases[J]. Radiology, 2018.
11.Singh S , Venkatesh S K , Loomba R , et al. Magnetic resonance elastography for staging liver fibrosis in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: a diagnostic accuracy systematic review and individual participant data pooled analysis[J]. European Radiology, 2016, 26(5):1431-1440.
12.Shi Y , Guo Q , F Xia, et al. MR Elastography for the Assessment of Hepatic Fibrosis in Patients with Chronic Hepatitis B Infection: Does Histologic Necroinflammation Influence the Measurement of Hepatic Stiffness?[J]. Radiology, 2014, 273(1):88-98.
13. Shintaro, Ichikawa, Utaroh, et al. Hepatitis activity should be considered a confounder of liver stiffness measured with MR elastography[J]. Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging, 2014.
14. Venkatesh SK, Yin M, Ehman RL. Magnetic resonance elastography of liver: technique, analysis, and clinical applications. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2013; 37:544–55. [PubMed: 23423795]
15. Hagström H, Nasr P, Ekstedt M, et al. SAF score and mortality in NAFLD after up to 41 years of follow-up. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2017 Jan;52(1):87-91. doi: 10.1080/00365521.2016.1230779. Epub 2016 Sep 10. PMID: 27616339.
16. Sandrin L, Tanter M, Gennisson JL, et al. Shear elasticity probe for soft tissues with 1-D transient elastography. IEEE Trans Ultrason Ferroelectr Freq Control 2002;49:436–446.
17. Sumida Y, Yoneda M, Hyogo H, et al; Japan Study Group of Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease (JSG- NAFLD). Validation of the FIB4 index in a Japanese nonalcoholic fatty liver disease population. BMC Gas- troenterol 2012;12:2.
18. Wai CT, Greenson JK, Fontana RJ, et al. A simple noninvasive index can predict both significant fibrosis and cirrhosis in patients with chronic hepatitis C. Hep- atology 2003;38:518–526.
19. Hsu C, Caussy C, Imajo K, et al. Magnetic Resonance vs Transient Elastography Analysis of Patients With Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease: A Systematic Review and Pooled Analysis of Individual Participants. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2019 Mar;17(4):630-637.e8. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2018.05.059. Epub 2018 Jun 14. PMID: 29908362; PMCID: PMC6294709.
20. Bedossa P, Carrat F. Liver biopsy: the best, not the gold standard. J Hepatol 2009;50:1–3
Ratziu V, Charlotte F, Heurtier A, et al. Sampling variability of liver biopsy in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease.Gastroenterology 2005;128:1898–1906.
22. Ampuero J, Pais R, Aller R, et al. HEPAmet Registry. Development and Validation of Hepamet Fibrosis Scoring System-A Simple, Noninvasive Test to Identify Patients With Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease With Advanced Fibrosis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2020 Jan;18(1):216-225.e5. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2019.05.051. Epub 2019 Jun 11. PMID: 31195161.
23. Venkatesh SK, Yin M, Ehman RL. Magnetic resonance elastography of the liver: technique, analysis, and clinical applications. J Magn Reson Imaging 2013;37:544–555
24.Hines CD, Bley TA, Lindstrom MJ, et al. Repeatability of magnetic resonance elastography for quantification of hepatic stiffness. J Magn Reson Imaging 2010;31:725–731.
25. Vilar-Gomez, E., Lou, Z., Kong, N., et al. Cost effectiveness of different strategies for detecting cirrhosis in patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease based on United States health care system. Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology 2020;18(10): 2305e2314 e2312.
26.Kennedy P, Wagner M, Cast ra L, et al. Quantitative elastography methods in liver disease: Current evidence and future directions. Radiology. 2018;286(3):738–763
27.Imajo K, Kessoku T, Honda Y, et al. Magnetic Resonance Imaging More Accurately Classifies Steatosis and Fibrosis in Patients With Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease Than Transient Elastography. Gastroenterology. 2016 Mar;150(3):626-637.e7. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2015.11.048. Epub 2015 Dec 8. PMID: 26677985.
28. Yin M, Talwalkar JA, Glaser KJ, et al. Assessment of hepatic fibrosis with magnetic resonance elastography. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2007 Oct;5(10):1207-1213.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2007.06.012. PMID: 17916548; PMCID: PMC2276978//.
29. Loomba R, Wolfson T, Ang B, et al. Magnetic resonance elastography predicts advanced fibrosis in patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: a prospective study. Hepatology. 2014 Dec;60(6):1920-8. doi: 10.1002/hep.27362. Epub 2014 Oct 29. Erratum in: Hepatology. 2015 Nov;62(5):1646. PMID: 25103310; PMCID: PMC4245360.
30.Sumida Y, Yoneda M, Hyogo H, et al; Japan Study Group of Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease (JSG- NAFLD). Validation of the FIB4 index in a Japanese nonalcoholic fatty liver disease population. BMC Gas- troenterol 2012;12:2.
31.Borsoi Viana MS, Takei K, Collarile Yamaguti DC, Guz B, Strauss E. Use of AST platelet ratio index (APRI Score) as an alternative to liver biopsy for treatment indication in chronic hepatitis C. Ann Hepatol. 2009 Jan-Mar;8(1):26-31. PMID: 19221530.
32.Lazarus, J.V., Mark, H.E., Anstee, Q.M. et al. Advancing the global public health agenda for NAFLD: a consensus statement. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 19, 60–78 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41575-021-00523-4
33. Antonio Liguori, Mirko Zoncapè, Emmanuel A. Tsochatzis. Non-invasive liver fibrosis tests in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. Rev Esp Digest 2022; Online ahead of print. DOI: 10.17235/reed.2022.8718/2022
34. Noureddin M, Lam J, Peterson MR, et al. Utility of magnetic resonance imaging versus histology for quantifying changes in liver fat in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease trials. Hepatology. 2013 Dec;58(6):1930-40. doi: 10.1002/hep.26455. Epub 2013 Oct 17. PMID: 23696515; PMCID: PMC4819962.
35. Loomba R, Neuschwander-Tetri BA, Sanyal A, et al. NASH Clinical Research Network. Multicenter Validation of Association Between Decline in MRI-PDFF and Histologic Response in NASH. Hepatology. 2020 Oct;72(4):1219-1229. doi: 10.1002/hep.31121. Epub 2020 Oct 9. PMID: 31965579; PMCID: PMC8055244.
36. Ichikawa S, Motosugi U, Nakazawa T, et al. Hepatitis activity should be considered a confounder of liver stiffness measured with MR elastography. J Magn Reson Imaging. 201410.1002/jmri.24666
37.Park CC, Nguyen P, Hernandez C, et al. Magnetic resonance elastography vs transient elastography in detection of fibrosis and noninvasive measurement of steatosis in patients with biopsy-proven nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Gastroenterology 2017;152:598–607 e2.
Related articles
Citation tools
Lara Romero C, Liang J, Fernández Lizaranzazu I, Ampuero Herrojo J, Castell J, del Prado Alba C, et all. Liver stiffness accuracy by magnetic resonance elastography in histologically proven non-alcoholic fatty liver disease patients: a Spanish cohort. 8777/2022


Download to a citation manager

Download the citation for this article by clicking on one of the following citation managers:

Metrics
This article has received 1108 visits.
This article has been downloaded 191 times.

Statistics from Dimensions


Statistics from Plum Analytics

Publication history

Received: 08/03/2022

Accepted: 01/07/2022

Online First: 06/07/2022

Published: 03/04/2023

Article revision time: 106 days

Article Online First time: 120 days

Article editing time: 391 days


Share
This article hasn't been rated yet.
Reader rating:
Valora este artículo:




Asociación Española de Ecografía Digestiva Sociedad Española de Endoscopia Digestiva Sociedad Española de Patología Digestiva
The Spanish Journal of Gastroenterology is the official organ of the Sociedad Española de Patología Digestiva, the Sociedad Española de Endoscopia Digestiva and the Asociación Española de Ecografía Digestiva
Cookie policy Privacy Policy Legal Notice © Copyright 2023 y Creative Commons. The Spanish Journal of Gastroenterology