Park Charlie C, Nguyen Phirum, Hernandez Carolyn, Bettencourt Ricki, Ramirez Kimberly, Fortney Lynda, Hooker Jonathan, Sy Ethan, Savides Michael T, Alquiraish Mosab H, Valasek Mark A, Rizo Emily, Richards Lisa, Brenner David, Sirlin Claude B, Loomba Rohit
Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease Research Center, Department of Medicine, University of California at San Diego, La Jolla, California.
Liver Imaging Group, Department of Radiology, University of California at San Diego, La Jolla, California.
Gastroenterology. 2017 Feb;152(3):598-607.e2. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2016.10.026. Epub 2016 Oct 27.
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) techniques and ultrasound-based transient elastography (TE) can be used in noninvasive diagnosis of fibrosis and steatosis in patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). We performed a prospective study to compare the performance of magnetic resonance elastography (MRE) vs TE for diagnosis of fibrosis, and MRI-based proton density fat fraction (MRI-PDFF) analysis vs TE-based controlled attenuation parameter (CAP) for diagnosis of steatosis in patients undergoing biopsy to assess NAFLD.
We performed a cross-sectional study of 104 consecutive adults (56.7% female) who underwent MRE, TE, and liver biopsy analysis (using the histologic scoring system for NAFLD from the Nonalcoholic Steatohepatitis Clinical Research Network Scoring System) from October 2011 through May 2016 at a tertiary medical center. All patients received a standard clinical evaluation, including collection of history, anthropometric examination, and biochemical tests. The primary outcomes were fibrosis and steatosis. Secondary outcomes included dichotomized stages of fibrosis and nonalcoholic steatohepatitis vs no nonalcoholic steatohepatitis. Receiver operating characteristic curve analyses were used to compare performances of MRE vs TE in diagnosis of fibrosis (stages 1-4 vs 0) and MRI-PDFF vs CAP for diagnosis of steatosis (grades 1-3 vs 0) with respect to findings from biopsy analysis.
MRE detected any fibrosis (stage 1 or more) with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of 0.82 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.74-0.91), which was significantly higher than that of TE (AUROC, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.56-0.78). MRI-PDFF detected any steatosis with an AUROC of 0.99 (95% CI, 0.98-1.00), which was significantly higher than that of CAP (AUROC, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.75-0.96). MRE detected fibrosis of stages 2, 3, or 4 with AUROC values of 0.89 (95% CI, 0.83-0.96), 0.87 (95% CI, 0.78-0.96), and 0.87 (95% CI, 0.71-1.00); TE detected fibrosis of stages 2, 3, or 4 with AUROC values of 0.86 (95% CI, 0.77-0.95), 0.80 (95% CI, 0.67-0.93), and 0.69 (95% CI, 0.45-0.94). MRI-PDFF identified steatosis of grades 2 or 3 with AUROC values of 0.90 (95% CI, 0.82-0.97) and 0.92 (95% CI, 0.84-0.99); CAP identified steatosis of grades 2 or 3 with AUROC values of 0.70 (95% CI, 0.58-0.82) and 0.73 (95% CI, 0.58-0.89).
In a prospective, cross-sectional study of more than 100 patients, we found MRE to be more accurate than TE in identification of liver fibrosis (stage 1 or more), using biopsy analysis as the standard. MRI-PDFF is more accurate than CAP in detecting all grades of steatosis in patients with NAFLD.
磁共振成像(MRI)技术和基于超声的瞬时弹性成像(TE)可用于非酒精性脂肪性肝病(NAFLD)患者纤维化和脂肪变性的无创诊断。我们进行了一项前瞻性研究,比较磁共振弹性成像(MRE)与TE诊断纤维化的性能,以及基于MRI的质子密度脂肪分数(MRI-PDFF)分析与基于TE的受控衰减参数(CAP)诊断脂肪变性的性能,这些患者均接受了活检以评估NAFLD。
我们对2011年10月至2016年5月在一家三级医疗中心连续接受MRE、TE和肝活检分析(使用非酒精性脂肪性肝炎临床研究网络评分系统的NAFLD组织学评分系统)的104例成年人(56.7%为女性)进行了横断面研究。所有患者均接受了标准的临床评估,包括病史采集、人体测量检查和生化检测。主要结局为纤维化和脂肪变性。次要结局包括纤维化的二分阶段以及非酒精性脂肪性肝炎与无非酒精性脂肪性肝炎。采用受试者操作特征曲线分析,根据活检分析结果比较MRE与TE诊断纤维化(1-4期与0期)以及MRI-PDFF与CAP诊断脂肪变性(1-3级与0级)的性能。
MRE检测到任何纤维化(1期或更高分期)的受试者操作特征曲线下面积(AUROC)为0.82(95%置信区间[CI],0.74-0.91),显著高于TE(AUROC,0.67;95%CI,0.56-0.78)。MRI-PDFF检测到任何脂肪变性的AUROC为0.99(95%CI,0.98-1.00),显著高于CAP(AUROC,0.85;95%CI,0.75-0.96)。MRE检测2、3或4期纤维化的AUROC值分别为0.89(95%CI,0.83-0.96)、0.87(95%CI,0.78-0.96)和0.87(95%CI,0.71-1.00);TE检测2、3或4期纤维化的AUROC值分别为0.86(95%CI,0.77-0.95)、0.80(95%CI,0.67-0.93)和0.69(95%CI,0.45-0.94)。MRI-PDFF识别2或3级脂肪变性的AUROC值分别为0.90(95%CI,0.82-0.