Cargando…

Diagnostic Accuracy of FibroScan and Factors Affecting Measurements

Evaluating liver steatosis and fibrosis is important for patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. Although liver biopsy and pathological assessment is the gold standard for these conditions, this technique has several disadvantages. The evaluation of steatosis and fibrosis using ultrasound B...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Oeda, Satoshi, Tanaka, Kenichi, Oshima, Ayaka, Matsumoto, Yasue, Sueoka, Eisaburo, Takahashi, Hirokazu
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7696616/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33198092
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics10110940
_version_ 1783615446025502720
author Oeda, Satoshi
Tanaka, Kenichi
Oshima, Ayaka
Matsumoto, Yasue
Sueoka, Eisaburo
Takahashi, Hirokazu
author_facet Oeda, Satoshi
Tanaka, Kenichi
Oshima, Ayaka
Matsumoto, Yasue
Sueoka, Eisaburo
Takahashi, Hirokazu
author_sort Oeda, Satoshi
collection PubMed
description Evaluating liver steatosis and fibrosis is important for patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. Although liver biopsy and pathological assessment is the gold standard for these conditions, this technique has several disadvantages. The evaluation of steatosis and fibrosis using ultrasound B-mode imaging is qualitative and subjective. The liver stiffness measurement (LSM) and controlled attenuation parameter (CAP) determined using FibroScan are the evidence-based non-invasive measures of liver fibrosis and steatosis, respectively. The LSM and CAP measurements are carried out simultaneously, and the median values of more than ten valid measurements are used to quantify liver fibrosis and steatosis. Here, we demonstrate that the reliability of the LSM depends on the interquartile range to median ratio (IQR/Med), but CAP values do not depend on IQR/Med. In addition, the LSM is affected by inflammation, congestion, and cholestasis in addition to fibrosis, while CAP values are affected by the body mass index in addition to steatosis. We also show that the M probe provides higher LSM values but lower CAP values than the XL probe in the same population. However, there was no statistically significant difference between the diagnostic accuracies of the two probes. These findings are important to understand the reliability of FibroScan measurements and the factors influencing measurement values for all patients.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7696616
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-76966162020-11-29 Diagnostic Accuracy of FibroScan and Factors Affecting Measurements Oeda, Satoshi Tanaka, Kenichi Oshima, Ayaka Matsumoto, Yasue Sueoka, Eisaburo Takahashi, Hirokazu Diagnostics (Basel) Review Evaluating liver steatosis and fibrosis is important for patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. Although liver biopsy and pathological assessment is the gold standard for these conditions, this technique has several disadvantages. The evaluation of steatosis and fibrosis using ultrasound B-mode imaging is qualitative and subjective. The liver stiffness measurement (LSM) and controlled attenuation parameter (CAP) determined using FibroScan are the evidence-based non-invasive measures of liver fibrosis and steatosis, respectively. The LSM and CAP measurements are carried out simultaneously, and the median values of more than ten valid measurements are used to quantify liver fibrosis and steatosis. Here, we demonstrate that the reliability of the LSM depends on the interquartile range to median ratio (IQR/Med), but CAP values do not depend on IQR/Med. In addition, the LSM is affected by inflammation, congestion, and cholestasis in addition to fibrosis, while CAP values are affected by the body mass index in addition to steatosis. We also show that the M probe provides higher LSM values but lower CAP values than the XL probe in the same population. However, there was no statistically significant difference between the diagnostic accuracies of the two probes. These findings are important to understand the reliability of FibroScan measurements and the factors influencing measurement values for all patients. MDPI 2020-11-12 /pmc/articles/PMC7696616/ /pubmed/33198092 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics10110940 Text en © 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Review
Oeda, Satoshi
Tanaka, Kenichi
Oshima, Ayaka
Matsumoto, Yasue
Sueoka, Eisaburo
Takahashi, Hirokazu
Diagnostic Accuracy of FibroScan and Factors Affecting Measurements
title Diagnostic Accuracy of FibroScan and Factors Affecting Measurements
title_full Diagnostic Accuracy of FibroScan and Factors Affecting Measurements
title_fullStr Diagnostic Accuracy of FibroScan and Factors Affecting Measurements
title_full_unstemmed Diagnostic Accuracy of FibroScan and Factors Affecting Measurements
title_short Diagnostic Accuracy of FibroScan and Factors Affecting Measurements
title_sort diagnostic accuracy of fibroscan and factors affecting measurements
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7696616/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33198092
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics10110940
work_keys_str_mv AT oedasatoshi diagnosticaccuracyoffibroscanandfactorsaffectingmeasurements
AT tanakakenichi diagnosticaccuracyoffibroscanandfactorsaffectingmeasurements
AT oshimaayaka diagnosticaccuracyoffibroscanandfactorsaffectingmeasurements
AT matsumotoyasue diagnosticaccuracyoffibroscanandfactorsaffectingmeasurements
AT sueokaeisaburo diagnosticaccuracyoffibroscanandfactorsaffectingmeasurements
AT takahashihirokazu diagnosticaccuracyoffibroscanandfactorsaffectingmeasurements