PMID- 36586759
OWN - NLM
STAT- MEDLINE
DCOM- 20230825
LR  - 20231003
IS  - 1878-4046 (Electronic)
IS  - 1076-6332 (Print)
IS  - 1076-6332 (Linking)
VI  - 30
IP  - 9
DP  - 2023 Sep
TI  - Diagnostic Performance Comparison Between Ultrasound Attenuation Measurements 
      From Right and Left Hepatic Lobes for Steatosis Detection in Non-alcoholic Fatty 
      Liver Disease.
PG  - 1838-1845
LID - S1076-6332(22)00681-X [pii]
LID - 10.1016/j.acra.2022.12.025 [doi]
AB  - RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is currently 
      diagnosed by liver biopsy or MRI proton density fat fraction (MRI-PDFF) from left 
      hepatic lobe (LTHL) and/or right hepatic lobe (RTHL). The objective of this study 
      was to compare the diagnostic value of ultrasound attenuation coefficients (ACs) 
      from RTHL and LTHL in detecting hepatic steatosis using biopsy or MRI-PDFF as a 
      reference standard. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty-six patients with suspected 
      NAFLD were imaged with an Aplio i800 ultrasound scanner (Canon Medical Systems, 
      Tustin, CA). Five AC measurements from RTHL and LTHL were averaged separately and 
      together to be compared with the reference standard. RESULTS: Forty-seven 
      patients (71%) were diagnosed with NAFLD. Mean ACs were significantly higher in 
      fatty livers than non-fatty livers (RTHL: 0.73 +/- 0.10 vs. 0.63 +/- 0.07 dB/cm/MHZ; 
      p < 0.0001, LTHL: 0.78 +/- 0.11 vs. 0.63 +/- 0.06 dB/cm/MHz; p < 0.0001, RTHL & LTHL: 
      0.76 +/- 0.09 vs. 0.63 +/- 0.05 dB/cm/MHz; p < 0.0001). Biopsy steatosis grades (n 
      =31) were better correlated with the mean ACs of RTHL & LTHL (r = 0.72) compared 
      to LTHL (r = 0.67) or RTHL (r = 0.61). Correlation between MRI-PDFF (n = 35) and 
      mean ACs was better for LTHL (r = 0.69) compared to the RTHL & LTHL (r = 0.66) or 
      RTHL (r = 0.45). Higher diagnostic accuracy was shown for the mean ACs of RTHL & 
      LTHL (AUC 0.89, specificity 94%, sensitivity 78%) compared to LTHL (AUC 0.89, 
      specificity 88%, sensitivity 82%) or RTHL (AUC 0.81, specificity 89%, sensitivity 
      68%). CONCLUSION: Ultrasound ACs from RTHL and LTHL showed comparable diagnostic 
      values in detection of hepatic steatosis with the highest diagnostic accuracy 
      when they were averaged together.
CI  - Copyright (c) 2022 The Association of University Radiologists. Published by 
      Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
FAU - Torkzaban, Mehnoosh
AU  - Torkzaban M
AD  - Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
FAU - Wessner, Corinne E
AU  - Wessner CE
AD  - Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
FAU - Halegoua-DeMarzio, Dina
AU  - Halegoua-DeMarzio D
AD  - Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, Thomas 
      Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
FAU - Rodgers, Shuchi K
AU  - Rodgers SK
AD  - Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
FAU - Lyshchik, Andrej
AU  - Lyshchik A
AD  - Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
FAU - Nam, Kibo
AU  - Nam K
AD  - Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 
      Electronic address: kibo.nam@jefferson.edu.
LA  - eng
GR  - R01 CA215520/CA/NCI NIH HHS/United States
PT  - Journal Article
PT  - Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
DEP - 20221229
PL  - United States
TA  - Acad Radiol
JT  - Academic radiology
JID - 9440159
RN  - 0 (Protons)
SB  - IM
MH  - Humans
MH  - *Non-alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease/complications/diagnostic imaging
MH  - Liver/diagnostic imaging/pathology
MH  - Magnetic Resonance Imaging/methods
MH  - Ultrasonography/methods
MH  - Adipose Tissue/diagnostic imaging
MH  - Protons
PMC - PMC10307925
MID - NIHMS1860217
OTO - NOTNLM
OT  - Attenuation coefficient
OT  - Fatty liver
OT  - Hepatic steatosis
OT  - Left hepatic lobe
OT  - NAFLD
OT  - Quantitative ultrasound
EDAT- 2023/01/01 06:00
MHDA- 2023/08/25 06:42
PMCR- 2024/09/01
CRDT- 2022/12/31 21:53
PHST- 2022/08/02 00:00 [received]
PHST- 2022/11/21 00:00 [revised]
PHST- 2022/12/16 00:00 [accepted]
PHST- 2024/09/01 00:00 [pmc-release]
PHST- 2023/08/25 06:42 [medline]
PHST- 2023/01/01 06:00 [pubmed]
PHST- 2022/12/31 21:53 [entrez]
AID - S1076-6332(22)00681-X [pii]
AID - 10.1016/j.acra.2022.12.025 [doi]
PST - ppublish
SO  - Acad Radiol. 2023 Sep;30(9):1838-1845. doi: 10.1016/j.acra.2022.12.025. Epub 2022 
      Dec 29.