Comparison of Quantitative Liver US and MRI in Patients with Liver                     Disease

Alves, Vinicius P V; Dillman, Jonathan R.; Tkach, Jean A.; Bennett, Paula S; Xanthakos, Stavra A.; Trout, Andrew T.

doi:10.1148/radiol.212995

Cited by 5 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, there has been a significant effort in investigating and developing non-invasive alternatives for steatosis evaluation, specifically in MRI and ultrasound. Several studies have shown the potential of ultrasound attenuation index to detect hepatic steatosis [9][10][11]. Using a clinically approved linear probe, the same technique has yet to be fully explored.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Ultrasound Attenuation Imaging Using a Linear versus a Conventional Convex Probe: A Volunteer Study

Hänni,

Ruby,

Paverd

et al. 2024

Diagnostics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The study aimed to investigate the feasibility of attenuation imaging (ATI) measurements using a linear probe on healthy volunteers and compare measurements with the conventional convex probe. Attenuation imaging measurements of the liver tissue were taken using ultrasound with a convex and a linear probe in 33 volunteers by two examining doctors, and the measurements were repeated 4–5 weeks later by one of them. The ATI values for the linear probe were in the range of the values for the convex probe for both examiners. Measurements did not change significantly for 32 out of 33 volunteers after 4–5 weeks when using the linear probe. The size of the region of interest (ROI) only impacted the ATI values for the convex probe; it did not affect the values taken with the linear probe. Healthy volunteers were measured, and their attenuation values were compared to those from a convex probe, commonly used in steatosis evaluation. When both probes were positioned in the same liver area, they showed good agreement in attenuation values, though depth significantly affected the measurements, with both probes providing different values at different depths. The study’s results aligned with previous research using the same system. Operator A and B’s results were compared, demonstrating similar ranges of values for both probes. The linear probe has been demonstrated to allow for superficial measurements and attain ATI values in line with that of the convex probe in the liver.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Ultrasound Attenuation Imaging Using a Linear versus a Conventional Convex Probe: A Volunteer Study

Hänni,

Ruby,

Paverd

et al. 2024

Diagnostics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

A Comparative Study of Three Systems for Liver Magnetic Resonance Elastography

Wang,

Qiu

et al. 2024

Magnetic Resonance Imaging

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundDifferent MR elastography (MRE) systems may produce different stiffness measurements, making direct comparison difficult in multi‐center investigations.PurposeTo assess the repeatability and reproducibility of liver stiffness measured by three typical MRE systems.Study TypeProspective.Population/PhantomsThirty volunteers without liver disease history (20 males, aged 21–28)/5 gel phantoms.Field Strength/Sequence3.0 T United Imaging Healthcare (UIH), 1.5 T Siemens Healthcare, 3.0 T General Electric Healthcare (GE)/Echo planar imaging‐based MRE sequence.AssessmentWave images of volunteers and phantoms were acquired by three MRE systems. Tissue stiffness was evaluated by two observers, while phantom stiffness was assessed automatically by code. The reproducibility across three MRE systems was quantified based on the mean stiffness of each volunteer and phantom.Statistical TestsIntraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), coefficients of variation (CV), and Bland–Altman analyses were used to assess the interobserver reproducibility, the interscan repeatability, and the intersystem reproducibility. Paired t‐tests were performed to assess the interobserver and interscan variation. Friedman tests with Dunn's multiple comparison correction were performed to assess the intersystem variation. P values less than 0.05 indicated significant difference.ResultsThe reproducibility of stiffness measured by the two observers demonstrated consistency with ICC > 0.92, CV < 4.32%, Mean bias < 2.23%, and P > 0.06. The repeatability of measurements obtained using the electromagnetic system for the liver revealed ICC > 0.96, CV < 3.86%, Mean bias < 0.19%, P > 0.90. When considering the range of reproducibility across the three systems for liver evaluations, results ranged with ICCs from 0.70 to 0.87, CVs from 6.46% to 10.99%, and Mean biases between 1.89% and 6.30%. Phantom studies showed similar results. The values of measured stiffness differed across all three systems significantly.Data ConclusionLiver stiffness values measured from different MRE systems can be different, but the measurements across the three MRE systems produced consistent results with excellent reproducibility.Evidence Level1Technical EfficacyStage 2

show abstract