Comparison study of sound touch quantification and acoustic radiation force impulse imaging in measuring liver and spleen stiffness

doi:10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-0793.2019.05.015

Abstract

Abstract:

Objective

To compare sound touch quantification (STQ) and acoustic radiation force impulse imaging (ARFI) in measuring liver and spleen stiffness.

Methods

From January 2018 to April 2019, using STQ and ARFI technology, a total of one hundred and seventy subjects (71 healthy volunteers and 99 patients with chronic hepatitis B) were tested for liver and spleen stiffness. The success rate, variability and measured values of the two techniques were compared.

Results

The success rate of liver STQ and ARFI was 96.5% (164/170) and 95.9% (163/170) (χ2<0.001, P=0.996), and the variability was (6.48±4.72) %and (8.75±5.01) % (t=4.127, P<0.001), respectively. The success rate of spleen STQ and ARFI was 94.7% (161/170) and 92.9% (158/170) (χ2=0.215, P=0.643), and the variability was (7.34±4.26) % and (11.04±4.77) % (t=6.282, P<0.001), respectively. Normal liver STQ and ARFI values were (1.45±0.18) m/sand (1.15±0.30) m/s (t=7.565, P<0.001), and chronic hepatitis B patients were (1.59±0.26) m/s and (1.24±0.30) m/s (t=14.005, P<0.001). The normal spleen STQ and ARFI values were (2.31±0.25) m/sand (1.96±0.45) m/s (t=5.555, P<0.001), and chronic hepatitis B patients were (2.33±0.25) m/s and (2.08±0.42) m/s (t=5.396, P<0.001), respectively.

Conclusions

The success rate of STQ and ARFI is high and the variability is low. Compared with ARFI, STQ further improves the stability of measurement. In addition, the measured values of STQ and ARFI cannot be directly equivalent, which needs to be distinguished in clinical application.

Key words: Ultrasonography, Hepatitis B, chronic, Spleen, Hardness, Sound touch quantification, Acoustic radiation force impulse imaging

Qingjuan Wang, Jian Zheng, Rizhen Gu, Xiaohong Yao, Siliang Kang, Lexiang Long, Dan Zhou, Xiaoli Wang, Rongqin Zheng. Comparison study of sound touch quantification and acoustic radiation force impulse imaging in measuring liver and spleen stiffness[J]. Chinese Archives of General Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2019, 13(05): 398-401.

/ / Recommend

Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

URL: https://zhptwkxwx.cma-cmc.com.cn/EN/10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-0793.2019.05.015

https://zhptwkxwx.cma-cmc.com.cn/EN/Y2019/V13/I05/398

Figures/Tables 3

References 17

[1]	Kishimoto R, Kikuchi K, Koyama A, et al. Intra- and inter-operator reproducibility of US point shear-wave elastography in various organs: evaluation in phantoms and healthy volunteers[J]. Eur Radiol, 2019. [Epub ahead of print]
[2]	Eddowes PJ, Sasso M, Allison M, et al. Accuracy of FibroScan controlled attenuation parameter and liver stiffness measurement in assessing steatosis and fibrosis in patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease[J]. Gastroenterology, 2019, 156(6): 1717-1730.
[3]	Wang K, Lu X, Zhou H, et al. Deep learning Radiomics of shear wave elastography significantly improved diagnostic performance for assessing liver fibrosis in chronic hepatitis B: a prospective multicentre study[J]. Gut, 2019, 68(4): 729-741.
[4]	Wong GL, Liang LY, Kwok R, et al. Low risk of variceal bleeding in patients with cirrhosis after variceal screening stratified by liver/spleen stiffness[J]. Hepatology, 2019. [Epub ahead of print]
[5]	Gao Y, Zheng J, Liang P, et al. Liver fibrosis with two-dimensional US shear-wave elastography in participants with chronic hepatitis B: A prospective multicenter study[J]. Radiology, 2018, 289(2): 407-415.
[6]	Castéra L, Foucher J, Bernard PH, et al. Pitfalls of liver stiffness measurement: a 5-year prospective study of 13,369 examinations[J]. Hepatology, 2010, 51(3): 828-835.
[7]	Ferraioli G, Wong VW, Castera L, et al. Liver ultrasound elastography: An update to the world federation for ultrasound in medicine and biology guidelines and recommendations[J]. Ultrasound Med Biol, 2018, 44(12): 2419-2440.
[8]	Hu X, Qiu L, Liu D, et al. Acoustic radiation force impulse (ARFI) elastography for noninvasive evaluation of hepatic fibrosis in chronic hepatitis B and C patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Med Ultrason, 2017, 19(1): 23-31.
[9]	Zhang L, Xu J, Wu H, et al. Screening breast lesions using shear modulus and its 1-mm shell in sound touch elastography[J]. Ultrasound Med Biol, 2019, 45(3): 710-719.
[10]	European Association for the Study of the Liver. EASL 2017 Clinical Practice Guidelines on the management of hepatitis B virus infection[J]. J Hepatol, 2017, 67(2): 370-398.
[11]	Dietrich CF, Bamber J, Berzigotti A, et al. EFSUMB guidelines and recommendations on the clinical use of liver ultrasound elastography, update 2017 (long version)[J]. Ultraschall Med, 2017, 38(4): e16-16e47.
[12]	Lim JK, Flamm SL, Singh S, et al. American Gastroenterological Association Institute guideline on the role of elastography in the evaluation of liver fibrosis[J]. Gastroenterology, 2017, 152(6): 1536-1543.
[13]	Shiha G, Ibrahim A, Helmy A, et al. Asian-Pacific Association for the Study of the Liver (APASL) consensus guidelines on invasive and non-invasive assessment of hepatic fibrosis: a 2016 update[J]. Hepatol Int, 2017, 11(1): 1-30.
[14]	Barr RG, Ferraioli G, Palmeri ML, et al. Elastography assessment of liver fibrosis: society of radiologists in Ultrasound Consensus Conference Statement[J]. Radiology, 2015, 276(3): 845-861.
[15]	Sandrin L, Fourquet B, Hasquenoph JM, et al. Transient elastography: a new noninvasive method for assessment of hepatic fibrosis[J]. Ultrasound Med Biol, 2003, 29(12): 1705-1713.
[16]	Piscaglia F, Salvatore V, Mulazzani L, et al. Ultrasound shear wave elastography for liver disease. A critical appraisal of the many actors on the stage[J]. Ultraschall Med, 2016, 37(1): 1-5.
[17]	郑剑，吴曼丽，张敏，等. 声触诊弹性成像和声触诊弹性测量检测肝脾硬度重复性研究[J/CD]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2019, 8(4): 366-369.

检测方法	失败	呼吸配合不好	变异度过大	脾脏体积小
肝STQ	6(3.5)	4(2.4)	2(1.2)	-
肝ARFI	7(4.1)	3(1.8)	4(2.4)	-
脾STQ	9(5.3)	5(2.9)	0(0)	4(2.4)
脾ARFI	12(7.1)	2(1.2)	7(4.1)	3(1.8)

检测方法	失败	呼吸配合不好	变异度过大	脾脏体积小
肝STQ	6(3.5)	4(2.4)	2(1.2)	-
肝ARFI	7(4.1)	3(1.8)	4(2.4)	-
脾STQ	9(5.3)	5(2.9)	0(0)	4(2.4)
脾ARFI	12(7.1)	2(1.2)	7(4.1)	3(1.8)

检测方法	变异度(%)		操作者内重复性(95%CI)		操作者间重复性(95%CI)
检测方法	肝脏	脾脏	肝脏	脾脏	肝脏	脾脏
STQ	6.48±4.72	7.34±4.26	0.955(0.943~0.965)	0.907(0.882~0.928)	0.938(0.864~0.972)	0.641(0.212~0.836)
ARFI	8.75±5.01	11.04±4.77	0.941(0.925~0.954)	0.929(0.910~0.946)	0.845(0.673~0.926)	0.543(0.057~0.802)
统计值	t=4.127	t=6.282	Z=1.232	Z=1.227	Z=1.721	Z=0.507
P值	<0.001	<0.001	0.218	0.220	0.085	0.612

检测方法	变异度(%)		操作者内重复性(95%CI)		操作者间重复性(95%CI)
检测方法	肝脏	脾脏	肝脏	脾脏	肝脏	脾脏
STQ	6.48±4.72	7.34±4.26	0.955(0.943~0.965)	0.907(0.882~0.928)	0.938(0.864~0.972)	0.641(0.212~0.836)
ARFI	8.75±5.01	11.04±4.77	0.941(0.925~0.954)	0.929(0.910~0.946)	0.845(0.673~0.926)	0.543(0.057~0.802)
统计值	t=4.127	t=6.282	Z=1.232	Z=1.227	Z=1.721	Z=0.507
P值	<0.001	<0.001	0.218	0.220	0.085	0.612

Please choose a citation manager

Content to export