Cargando…

How many times should we repeat measurements of the ultrasound-guided attenuation parameter for evaluating hepatic steatosis?

PURPOSE: This retrospective study aimed to determine the number of times the ultrasound-guided attenuation parameter (UGAP) should be measured during the evaluation of hepatic steatosis. METHODS: Patients with suspected nonalcoholic fatty liver disease who underwent two UGAP repetition protocols (si...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Seo, Duck Min, Lee, Sang Min, Park, Ji Won, Kim, Min-Jeong, Ha, Hong Il, Park, Sun-Young, Lee, Kwanseop
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Korean Society of Ultrasound in Medicine 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10071056/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36935602
http://dx.doi.org/10.14366/usg.22122
_version_ 1785019119232352256
author Seo, Duck Min
Lee, Sang Min
Park, Ji Won
Kim, Min-Jeong
Ha, Hong Il
Park, Sun-Young
Lee, Kwanseop
author_facet Seo, Duck Min
Lee, Sang Min
Park, Ji Won
Kim, Min-Jeong
Ha, Hong Il
Park, Sun-Young
Lee, Kwanseop
author_sort Seo, Duck Min
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: This retrospective study aimed to determine the number of times the ultrasound-guided attenuation parameter (UGAP) should be measured during the evaluation of hepatic steatosis. METHODS: Patients with suspected nonalcoholic fatty liver disease who underwent two UGAP repetition protocols (six-repetition [UGAP_6] and 12-repetition [UGAP_12]) and measurement of the controlled attenuation parameter (CAP) using transient elastography between October 2020 and June 2021 were enrolled. The mean attenuation coefficient (AC), interquartile range (IQR)/median, and coefficient of variance (CV) of the two repetition protocols were compared using the paired t test. Moreover, the diagnostic performances of UGAP_6 and UGAP_12 were compared using the area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve, considering the CAP value as a reference standard. RESULTS: The study included 160 patients (100 men; mean age, 50.9 years). There were no significant differences between UGAP_6 and UGAP_12 (0.731±0.116 dB/cm/MHz vs. 0.734±0.113 dB/cm/MHz, P=0.156) and mean CV (7.6±0.3% vs. 8.0±0.3%, P=0.062). However, the mean IQR/median of UGAP_6 was significantly lower than that of UGAP_12 (8.9%±6.0% vs. 9.8%±5.2%, P=0.012). In diagnosing the hepatic steatosis stage, UGAP_6 and UGAP_12 yielded comparable AUROCs (≥S1, 0.908 vs. 0.897, P=0.466; ≥S2, 0.883 vs. 0.897, P=0.126; S3, 0.832 vs. 0.834, P=0.799). CONCLUSION: UGAP had high diagnostic performance in diagnosing hepatic steatosis, regardless of the number of repetitions (six repetitions vs. 12 repetitions), with maintained reliability. Therefore, six UGAP measurements seem sufficient for evaluating hepatic steatosis using UGAP.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10071056
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Korean Society of Ultrasound in Medicine
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-100710562023-04-05 How many times should we repeat measurements of the ultrasound-guided attenuation parameter for evaluating hepatic steatosis? Seo, Duck Min Lee, Sang Min Park, Ji Won Kim, Min-Jeong Ha, Hong Il Park, Sun-Young Lee, Kwanseop Ultrasonography Original Article PURPOSE: This retrospective study aimed to determine the number of times the ultrasound-guided attenuation parameter (UGAP) should be measured during the evaluation of hepatic steatosis. METHODS: Patients with suspected nonalcoholic fatty liver disease who underwent two UGAP repetition protocols (six-repetition [UGAP_6] and 12-repetition [UGAP_12]) and measurement of the controlled attenuation parameter (CAP) using transient elastography between October 2020 and June 2021 were enrolled. The mean attenuation coefficient (AC), interquartile range (IQR)/median, and coefficient of variance (CV) of the two repetition protocols were compared using the paired t test. Moreover, the diagnostic performances of UGAP_6 and UGAP_12 were compared using the area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve, considering the CAP value as a reference standard. RESULTS: The study included 160 patients (100 men; mean age, 50.9 years). There were no significant differences between UGAP_6 and UGAP_12 (0.731±0.116 dB/cm/MHz vs. 0.734±0.113 dB/cm/MHz, P=0.156) and mean CV (7.6±0.3% vs. 8.0±0.3%, P=0.062). However, the mean IQR/median of UGAP_6 was significantly lower than that of UGAP_12 (8.9%±6.0% vs. 9.8%±5.2%, P=0.012). In diagnosing the hepatic steatosis stage, UGAP_6 and UGAP_12 yielded comparable AUROCs (≥S1, 0.908 vs. 0.897, P=0.466; ≥S2, 0.883 vs. 0.897, P=0.126; S3, 0.832 vs. 0.834, P=0.799). CONCLUSION: UGAP had high diagnostic performance in diagnosing hepatic steatosis, regardless of the number of repetitions (six repetitions vs. 12 repetitions), with maintained reliability. Therefore, six UGAP measurements seem sufficient for evaluating hepatic steatosis using UGAP. Korean Society of Ultrasound in Medicine 2023-04 2022-10-31 /pmc/articles/PMC10071056/ /pubmed/36935602 http://dx.doi.org/10.14366/usg.22122 Text en Copyright © 2023 Korean Society of Ultrasound in Medicine (KSUM) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) ) which permits unrestricted noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Seo, Duck Min
Lee, Sang Min
Park, Ji Won
Kim, Min-Jeong
Ha, Hong Il
Park, Sun-Young
Lee, Kwanseop
How many times should we repeat measurements of the ultrasound-guided attenuation parameter for evaluating hepatic steatosis?
title How many times should we repeat measurements of the ultrasound-guided attenuation parameter for evaluating hepatic steatosis?
title_full How many times should we repeat measurements of the ultrasound-guided attenuation parameter for evaluating hepatic steatosis?
title_fullStr How many times should we repeat measurements of the ultrasound-guided attenuation parameter for evaluating hepatic steatosis?
title_full_unstemmed How many times should we repeat measurements of the ultrasound-guided attenuation parameter for evaluating hepatic steatosis?
title_short How many times should we repeat measurements of the ultrasound-guided attenuation parameter for evaluating hepatic steatosis?
title_sort how many times should we repeat measurements of the ultrasound-guided attenuation parameter for evaluating hepatic steatosis?
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10071056/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36935602
http://dx.doi.org/10.14366/usg.22122
work_keys_str_mv AT seoduckmin howmanytimesshouldwerepeatmeasurementsoftheultrasoundguidedattenuationparameterforevaluatinghepaticsteatosis
AT leesangmin howmanytimesshouldwerepeatmeasurementsoftheultrasoundguidedattenuationparameterforevaluatinghepaticsteatosis
AT parkjiwon howmanytimesshouldwerepeatmeasurementsoftheultrasoundguidedattenuationparameterforevaluatinghepaticsteatosis
AT kimminjeong howmanytimesshouldwerepeatmeasurementsoftheultrasoundguidedattenuationparameterforevaluatinghepaticsteatosis
AT hahongil howmanytimesshouldwerepeatmeasurementsoftheultrasoundguidedattenuationparameterforevaluatinghepaticsteatosis
AT parksunyoung howmanytimesshouldwerepeatmeasurementsoftheultrasoundguidedattenuationparameterforevaluatinghepaticsteatosis
AT leekwanseop howmanytimesshouldwerepeatmeasurementsoftheultrasoundguidedattenuationparameterforevaluatinghepaticsteatosis