scholarly journals Reference values of normal liver stiffness in healthy children by two methods: 2D shear wave and transient elastography

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Cristina Oana Mărginean ◽  
Lorena Elena Meliţ ◽  
Dana Valentina Ghiga ◽  
Maria Oana Săsăran
Author(s):  
Anders Batman Mjelle ◽  
Anesa Mulabecirovic ◽  
Roald Flesland Havre ◽  
Edda Jonina Olafsdottir ◽  
Odd Helge Gilja ◽  
...  

Abstract Purpose Liver elastography is increasingly being applied in screening for and follow-up of pediatric liver disease, and has been shown to correlate well with fibrosis staging through liver biopsy. Because time is of the essence when examining children, we wanted to evaluate if a reliable result can be achieved with fewer acquisitions. Materials and Methods 243 healthy children aged 4–17 years were examined after three hours of fasting. Participants were divided into four age groups: 4–7 years; 8–11 years; 12–14 years and 15–17 years. Both two-dimensional shear wave elastography (2D-SWE; GE Logiq E9) and point shear wave elastography (pSWE; Samsung RS80A with Prestige) were performed in all participants, while transient elastography (TE, Fibroscan) was performed in a subset of 87 children aged 8–17 years. Median liver stiffness measurement (LSM) values of 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 acquisitions were compared with the median value of 10 acquisitions (reference standard). Comparison was performed for all participants together as well as within every specific age group. We investigated both the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) with absolute agreement and all outliers more than 10 %, 20 % or ≥ 0.5 or 1.0 kPa from the median of 10 acquisitions. Results For all three systems there was no significant difference between three and ten acquisitions, with ICCs ≥ 0.97. All systems needed 4 acquisitions to achieve no LSM deviating ≥ 1.0 kPa of a median of ten. To achieve no LSM deviating ≥ 20 % of a median of ten acquisitions, pSWE and TE needed 4 acquisitions, while 2D-SWE required 6 acquisitions. Conclusion Our results contradict recommendations of 10 acquisitions for pSWE and TE and only 3 for 2D-SWE.


2018 ◽  
Vol 49 (1) ◽  
pp. 91-98 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paraskevi Galina ◽  
Efthymia Alexopoulou ◽  
Aglaia Zellos ◽  
Virginia Grigoraki ◽  
Tania Siahanidou ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 75 (2) ◽  
pp. 125-133
Author(s):  
Soňa Franková ◽  
Jan Šperl

Portal hypertension represents a wide spectrum of complications of chronic liver diseases and may present by ascites, oesophageal varices, splenomegaly, hypersplenism, hepatorenal and hepatopulmonary syndrome or portopulmonary hypertension. Portal hypertension and its severity predicts the patient‘s prognosis: as an invasive technique, the portosystemic gradient (HPVG – hepatic venous pressure gradient) measurement by hepatic veins catheterisation has remained the gold standard of its assessment. A reliable, non-invasive method to assess the severity of portal hypertension is of paramount importance; the patients with clinically significant portal hypertension have a high risk of variceal bleeding and higher mortality. Recently, non-invasive methods enabling the assessment of liver stiffness have been introduced into clinical practice in hepatology. Not only may these methods substitute for liver biopsy, but they may also be used to assess the degree of liver fibrosis and predict the severity of portal hypertension. Nowadays, we can use the quantitative elastography (transient elastography, point shear-wave elastrography, 2D-shear-wave elastography) or magnetic resonance imaging. We may also assess the severity of portal hypertension based on the non-invasive markers of liver fibrosis (i.e. ELF test) or estimate clinically signifi cant portal hypertension using composite scores (LSPS – liver spleen stiff ness score), based on liver stiffness value, spleen diameter and platelet count. Spleen stiffness measurement is a new method that needs further prospective studies. The review describes current possibilities of the non-invasive assessment of portal hypertension and its severity.


2019 ◽  
Vol 49 (6) ◽  
pp. 676-686 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hiroko Iijima ◽  
Toshifumi Tada ◽  
Takashi Kumada ◽  
Natsuko Kobayashi ◽  
Masahiro Yoshida ◽  
...  

Sonography ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 141-145 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sandra O'Hara ◽  
Susan Hodson ◽  
Chandelle Hernaman ◽  
Nick Wambeek ◽  
John Olynyk

2012 ◽  
Vol 171 (9) ◽  
pp. 1415-1415 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giovanna Ferraioli ◽  
Raffaella Lissandrin ◽  
Mabel Zicchetti ◽  
Carlo Filice

2020 ◽  
Vol 40 (11) ◽  
pp. 2602-2611 ◽  
Author(s):  
Darrick K. Li ◽  
Muhammad Rehan Khan ◽  
Zhen Wang ◽  
Voranush Chongsrisawat ◽  
Panida Swangsak ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 143 ◽  
Author(s):  
Felix Bende ◽  
Ioan Sporea ◽  
Roxana Sirli ◽  
Alina Popescu ◽  
Ruxandra Mare ◽  
...  

Aim: To evaluate the performance of 2D shear-wave elastography from General Electric (2D-SWE.GE) for the noninvasiveassessment of liver fibrosis and to identify liver stiffness (LS) cut-off values for predicting different stages of fibrosisusing Transient Elastography (TE) as the reference method. Material and method: We included 331 consecutive subjectswith or without chronic hepatopathies in whom LS was evaluated in the same session by means of 2 elastographic techniques:TE and 2D-SWE.GE. Reliable LS measurements were defined for TE as the median value of 10 measurements with a successrate of ≥60% and an interquartile range (IQR)<30% and for 2D-SWE.GE as the median value of 10 measurements acquiredin a homogenous area and an IQR<30%. To discriminate between TE fibrosis stages we used the following cut-offs: F2- 7;F3- 9.5 and F4- 12kPa. Results: Reliable LS measurements were obtained in 95.8% subjects by 2D-SWE.GE, and 94.2%by TE (p=0.44). Based on TE cut-off values we divided our cohort into four groups: F<2: 30.1%; F=2: 10.2%; F=3: 12.2%;F=4: 47.5%. A strong correlation was found between the LS values obtained by the 2 methods: r=0.83, p<0.0001.LS valuesobtained by 2D-SWE.GE were significantly lower than those obtained by TE: 10.14±4.24 kPa vs. 16.72±13.4 kPa (p<0.0001).The best cut-off value for F≥2, F≥3 and for F=4 were 6.7, 8.2 and 9.3 kPa. Conclusions: The best 2D-SWE.GE cut-off valuesfor predicting F≥2, F≥3 and F=4 were 6.7, 8.2 and 9.3kPa.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document