Duck Min Seo, Sang Min Lee, Ji Won Park, Min-Jeong Kim, Hong Il Ha, Sun-Young Park, Kwanseop Lee
{"title":"How many times should we repeat measurements of the ultrasound-guided attenuation parameter for evaluating hepatic steatosis?","authors":"Duck Min Seo, Sang Min Lee, Ji Won Park, Min-Jeong Kim, Hong Il Ha, Sun-Young Park, Kwanseop Lee","doi":"10.14366/usg.22122","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This retrospective study aimed to determine the number of times the ultrasound-guided attenuation parameter (UGAP) should be measured during the evaluation of hepatic steatosis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients with suspected nonalcoholic fatty liver disease who underwent two UGAP repetition protocols (six-repetition [UGAP_6] and 12-repetition [UGAP_12]) and measurement of the controlled attenuation parameter (CAP) using transient elastography between October 2020 and June 2021 were enrolled. The mean attenuation coefficient (AC), interquartile range (IQR)/median, and coefficient of variance (CV) of the two repetition protocols were compared using the paired t test. Moreover, the diagnostic performances of UGAP_6 and UGAP_12 were compared using the area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve, considering the CAP value as a reference standard.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study included 160 patients (100 men; mean age, 50.9 years). There were no significant differences between UGAP_6 and UGAP_12 (0.731±0.116 dB/cm/MHz vs. 0.734±0.113 dB/cm/MHz, P=0.156) and mean CV (7.6±0.3% vs. 8.0±0.3%, P=0.062). However, the mean IQR/median of UGAP_6 was significantly lower than that of UGAP_12 (8.9%±6.0% vs. 9.8%±5.2%, P=0.012). In diagnosing the hepatic steatosis stage, UGAP_6 and UGAP_12 yielded comparable AUROCs (≥S1, 0.908 vs. 0.897, P=0.466; ≥S2, 0.883 vs. 0.897, P=0.126; S3, 0.832 vs. 0.834, P=0.799).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>UGAP had high diagnostic performance in diagnosing hepatic steatosis, regardless of the number of repetitions (six repetitions vs. 12 repetitions), with maintained reliability. Therefore, six UGAP measurements seem sufficient for evaluating hepatic steatosis using UGAP.</p>","PeriodicalId":54227,"journal":{"name":"Ultrasonography","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/3b/12/usg-22122.PMC10071056.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ultrasonography","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14366/usg.22122","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: This retrospective study aimed to determine the number of times the ultrasound-guided attenuation parameter (UGAP) should be measured during the evaluation of hepatic steatosis.
Methods: Patients with suspected nonalcoholic fatty liver disease who underwent two UGAP repetition protocols (six-repetition [UGAP_6] and 12-repetition [UGAP_12]) and measurement of the controlled attenuation parameter (CAP) using transient elastography between October 2020 and June 2021 were enrolled. The mean attenuation coefficient (AC), interquartile range (IQR)/median, and coefficient of variance (CV) of the two repetition protocols were compared using the paired t test. Moreover, the diagnostic performances of UGAP_6 and UGAP_12 were compared using the area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve, considering the CAP value as a reference standard.
Results: The study included 160 patients (100 men; mean age, 50.9 years). There were no significant differences between UGAP_6 and UGAP_12 (0.731±0.116 dB/cm/MHz vs. 0.734±0.113 dB/cm/MHz, P=0.156) and mean CV (7.6±0.3% vs. 8.0±0.3%, P=0.062). However, the mean IQR/median of UGAP_6 was significantly lower than that of UGAP_12 (8.9%±6.0% vs. 9.8%±5.2%, P=0.012). In diagnosing the hepatic steatosis stage, UGAP_6 and UGAP_12 yielded comparable AUROCs (≥S1, 0.908 vs. 0.897, P=0.466; ≥S2, 0.883 vs. 0.897, P=0.126; S3, 0.832 vs. 0.834, P=0.799).
Conclusion: UGAP had high diagnostic performance in diagnosing hepatic steatosis, regardless of the number of repetitions (six repetitions vs. 12 repetitions), with maintained reliability. Therefore, six UGAP measurements seem sufficient for evaluating hepatic steatosis using UGAP.
目的:本回顾性研究旨在确定超声引导衰减参数(UGAP)在肝脂肪变性评估中应测量的次数。方法:纳入在2020年10月至2021年6月期间接受两种UGAP重复治疗方案(6次重复[UGAP_6]和12次重复[UGAP_12])并使用瞬态弹性成像测量控制衰减参数(CAP)的疑似非酒精性脂肪肝患者。采用配对t检验比较两种重复治疗方案的平均衰减系数(AC)、四分位数间距(IQR)/中位数和方差系数(CV)。以受试者工作特征曲线下面积(AUROC)作为参考标准,比较UGAP_6和UGAP_12的诊断性能。结果:共纳入160例患者(男性100例;平均年龄50.9岁)。UGAP_6与UGAP_12之间差异无统计学意义(0.731±0.116 dB/cm/MHz vs. 0.734±0.113 dB/cm/MHz, P=0.156),平均CV值(7.6±0.3% vs. 8.0±0.3%,P=0.062)。而UGAP_6的平均IQR/中位数明显低于UGAP_12(8.9%±6.0% vs. 9.8%±5.2%,P=0.012)。在诊断肝脂肪变性分期方面,UGAP_6和UGAP_12的auroc具有可比性(≥S1, 0.908 vs. 0.897, P=0.466;≥S2, 0.883 vs. 0.897, P=0.126;S3, 0.832 vs. 0.834, P=0.799)。结论:无论重复次数(6次vs. 12次)如何,UGAP在诊断肝脂肪变性方面均具有较高的诊断效能,且可靠性保持不变。因此,使用UGAP进行六项测量似乎足以评估肝脂肪变性。
UltrasonographyMedicine-Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
6.50%
发文量
78
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊介绍:
Ultrasonography, the official English-language journal of the Korean Society of Ultrasound in Medicine (KSUM), is an international peer-reviewed academic journal dedicated to practice, research, technology, and education dealing with medical ultrasound. It is renamed from the Journal of Korean Society of Ultrasound in Medicine in January 2014, and published four times per year: January 1, April 1, July 1, and October 1. Original articles, technical notes, topical reviews, perspectives, pictorial essays, and timely editorial materials are published in Ultrasonography covering state-of-the-art content.
Ultrasonography aims to provide updated information on new diagnostic concepts and technical developments, including experimental animal studies using new equipment in addition to well-designed reviews of contemporary issues in patient care. Along with running KSUM Open, the annual international congress of KSUM, Ultrasonography also serves as a medium for cooperation among physicians and specialists from around the world who are focusing on various ultrasound technology and disease problems and relevant basic science.