Search

Introduction: Hepatic steatosis duration and severity are risk factors for liver fibrosis and cardiometabolic disease. We assessed the diagnostic accuracy of attenuation imaging (ATI), compared with histologic hepatosteatosis grading in adults with varied suspected liver pathologies. Methods: Liver biopsy was performed on 76 patients (51 women, 25 men) with non‐malignant diffuse parenchymal liver disease, within 4 weeks of multiparametric liver ultrasound including attenuation imaging (ATI). Skin‐liver capsule distance (SCD) and body mass index (BMI) were measured. Histologic steatosis was graded none (S0), mild (S1), moderate (S2) or severe (S3). We compared histology and sonographic parameters. Results: The median patient age was 50.5 (range 18–83) years and BMI 28.9 kg/m2 (interquartile range 24.0–33.3). The distribution of histologic steatosis grade was S0 (44%), S1(17%), S2(30%) and S3(9%). Median ATI value for each biopsy steatosis grade was 0.60 (IQR: 0.52–0.65), 0.65 (IQR: 0.6–0.71), 0.83 (IQR: 0.74–0.90) and 0.90 (IQR: 0.82–1.01) dB/cm/MHz for S0, S1, S2 and S3, respectively. The AUC of ATI for detection of any steatosis (S1‐S3) and moderate to severe steatosis (S2‐S3) was 0.85 (95% CI: 0.75–0.91) and 0.91 (95% CI: 0.83–0.99) with cut‐offs of 0.55 and 0.62 dB/cm/MHz. ATI threshold of 0.74 dB/cm/MHz was able to discriminate between S0‐S1 and S2‐3 with accuracy, CI and kappa statistic of 0.8889, 0.65–0.98 and 0.7534. Conclusion: We found a good correlation between ATI and steatosis grade. The most accurate discrimination was between none to mild (S0‐1) and moderate to severe (S2‐3) steatosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Hepatic steatosis screening is required to assess high‐risk populations, identify those for intervention, monitor response and prevent disease progression and complications. Liver biopsy and magnetic resonance imaging proton density fat fraction are current gold standards, but are limited by biopsy risk factors, patient tolerance and cost. Non‐invasive, cost‐effective, semi‐quantitative and quantitative ultrasound assessment exists. The aim of this study was to assess the correlation between the semi‐quantitative hepatorenal index (HRI) to assess hepatic steatosis using the quantitative attenuation imaging (ATI) as a reference standard, in adults with varied suspected liver pathologies. Methods: Data were collected prospectively between April 2019 and March 2020 at a tertiary institution on any patient >18 years referred to US assessment of suspected liver pathology. The only exclusion criteria were absent or invalid HRI or ATI measurements. Three hundred fifty eight patients were included. Results: There was a significant weak positive correlation between HRI and ATI (r = 0.351, P < 0.001) and between HRI steatosis grade (SG) and ATI SG (r = 0.329, P < 0.001), using previously established cut‐off values. With ATI as the reference standard, there was no significant correlation between HRI and hepatic steatosis within steatosis grades, nor for no (SG = 0) or any (SG > 0) hepatic steatosis. Conclusions: Our study in a typical heterogeneous clinical population suggests the semi‐quantitative HRI is of limited use in hepatic steatosis imaging. As HRI is the objective measure of the subjective brightness (B)‐mode assessment, this imaging feature may not be as reliable as previously thought. Quantitative ATI may be the preferred non‐invasive technique for hepatic steatosis assessment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction Methods Results Conclusion Globally, B‐mode ultrasound is the most common modality used for the diagnosis of hepatic steatosis. We aimed to assess the correlation between qualitative liver ultrasound parameters, attenuation imaging (ATI) and histopathology‐diagnosed steatosis grade obtained from liver biopsy. Our secondary aim was to examine the interobserver variability of qualitative ultrasound features.A retrospective cohort study was performed which included adult patients (age ≥ 18 years) who had same‐day liver ultrasound, ATI and liver biopsy for grading hepatic steatosis severity between 2018 and 2022. The qualitative US features for hepatic steatosis were independently scored by three radiologists and interobserver variability was examined. Histologic steatosis grade, ATI and qualitative ultrasound parameters were compared.Ninety patients were included; 67% female with a median age of 54 (IQR 39–65) years. The radiologist's overall impression had the highest correlation (very strongly correlated) with histologic steatosis grade (r = 0.82, P < 0.001). ATI coefficient and all qualitative ultrasound B‐mode features except for liver echotexture and focal fat sparing were strongly correlated with histologic steatosis grade (r ≥ 0.70, P < 0.001). Most qualitative ultrasound features had good agreement between observers (Kappa statistic 0.61–1.0, P < 0.001), (Kendall coefficient 0.92, P < 0.001).The examined qualitative ultrasound parameters and ATI had good‐excellent performance for diagnosing clinically significant hepatic steatosis; however, the radiologist's overall impression had the best correlation with histologic steatosis grade. Our findings suggest an ongoing role for qualitative liver ultrasound assessment of hepatic steatosis despite the emergence of newer quantitative measures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]