Highlights
- •List attenuation coefficient of the spleen in adults with NAFLD
- •List the attenuation coefficient ratio of the liver to spleen in NAFLD
- •Report high correlation of liver ultrasound attenuation coefficient to MRI-PDFF
Abstract
Objectives
The aim of the study was to assess ultrasound attenuation coefficient (AC) in adult
liver and spleen.
Methods
After obtaining IRB approval and written informed consent, liver AC and spleen AC
were measured, and AC liver to spleen ratio (AC L/S = AC liver/AC spleen) was calculated in 36 adult volunteers (16 men and 20 women, mean age 50y). Based
on magnetic resonance imaging derived proton density fat fraction (MRI-PDFF), the
participants were divided into normal liver (MRI-PDFF <5%) and steatotic liver (MRI-PDFF
≥5%) groups. Difference in AC between the liver and spleen in each group and differences
in liver AC and AC L/S between the two groups were analyzed using two-tailed t-test. Diagnostic performance of liver AC and AC L/S for determining hepatic steatosis
was tested by area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC).
Results
There were 12 normal livers and 24 steatotic livers in the study. The difference in
AC between liver and spleen was significant in steatotic liver group (p < 0.001) whereas it was not in normal liver group (p > 0.05). Differences in liver AC and AC L/S between the two groups were significant
(p < 0.001) whereas difference in spleen AC was not (p > 0.05). AUROC of liver AC and AC L/S for determining ≥ mild hepatic steatosis was
0.90 and 0.97, respectively.
Conclusion
Liver AC increased, and spleen AC did not change following the development of hepatic
steatosis. The feasibility of AC L/S in determining hepatic steatosis needs further
investigation.
Abbreviations:
AC (attenuation coefficient), AC L/S (attenuation coefficient liver to spleen ratio), ATI (attenuation imaging), AUROC (area under receiver operating characteristic curve), CT (computed tomography), LS (liver stiffness), MRE (magnetic resonance elastography), MRI-PDFF (magnetic resonance imaging-proton density fat fraction), NAFLD (nonalcoholic fatty liver disease)Keywords
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe to Clinical ImagingAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
- Hepatic steatosis (fatty liver disease) in asymptomatic adults identified by unenhanced low-dose CT.AJR. 2010; 194: 623-628
- Specificity of unenhanced CT for non-invasive diagnosis of hepatic steatosis: implications for the investigation of the natural history of incidental steatosis.Eur Radiol. 2012; 22: 1075-1082
- Quantification of liver fat with magnetic resonance imaging.Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am. 2010; 18: 337-357
- Agreement between magnetic resonance imaging proton density fat fraction measurements and pathologist-assigned steatosis grades of liver biopsies from adults with nonalcoholic steatohepatitis.Gastroenterology. 2017; 153: 753-761
- Utility of magnetic resonance imaging versus histology for quantifying changes in liver fat in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease trials.Hepatology. 2013; 58: 1930-1940
- The role of multiparametric US of the liver for the evaluation of nonalcoholic steatohepatitis.Radiology. 2020; 296: 532-540
- Accuracy of two-dimensional shear wave elastography and attenuation imaging for evaluation of patients with nonalcoholic steatohepatitis.Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2021; 19: 797-805.e7https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cgh.2020.05.034
- Non-invasive imaging biomarkers to assess nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: a review.Clin Imaging. 2021; 78: 22-34https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinimag.2021.02.039
- Detection of liver steatosis with a novel ultrasound-based technique: a pilot study using MRI-derived proton density fat fraction as the gold standard.Clin Transl Gastroenterol. 2019; 10 (e00081-e00081)
- Performance of the attenuation imaging technology in the detection of liver steatosis.J Ultrasound Med. 2021; 40: 1325-1332
- Update to the society of radiologists in ultrasound liver elastography consensus statement.Radiology. 2020; 296: 263-274
- Reliability of performing multiparametric ultrasound in adult livers.J Ultrasound Med. 2021; (13 May) (ahead of print)https://doi.org/10.1002/jum.15751
- Proton density fat-fraction: a standardized MR-based biomarker of tissue fat concentration.J Magn Reson Imaging. 2012; 36: 1011-1014
- Magnetic resonance elastography of liver: technique, analysis, and clinical applications.J Magn Reson Imaging. 2013; 37: 544-555
- Hepatic steatosis: quantification by proton density fat fraction with MR imaging versus liver biopsy.Radiology. 2013; 267: 767-775
- Elastography in chronic liver disease: modalities, techniques, limitations, and future directions.Radiographics. 2016; 36: 1987-2006
- Assessment of hepatic fibrosis with magnetic resonance elastography.Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2007; 5: 1207-1213.e2
- Quantification of hepatic steatosis with ultrasound: promising role of attenuation imaging coefficient in a biopsy-proven cohort.Eur Radiol. 2020; 30: 2293-2301
- Prospective evaluation of hepatic steatosis using ultrasound attenuation imaging in patients with chronic liver disease with magnetic resonance imaging proton density fat fraction as the reference standard.Ultrasound Med Biol. 2019; 45: 1407-1416
- Ultrasound-based technique for the diagnosis of liver steatosis.World J Gastroenterol. 2019; 25: 6053-6062https://doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v25.i40.6053
- Noninvasive assessment of liver disease in patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease.Gastroenterol. 2019; 156: 1264-1281
- MR imaging of the spleen: spectrum of abnormalities.Radiographics. 2005; 25: 967-982
- Assessment of chronic liver disease by multiparametric ultrasound: results from a private practice outpatient facility.Abdom Radiol. 2021; (July 25) (Online ahead of print)https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-021-03225-2
Article info
Publication history
Published online: February 17, 2022
Accepted:
February 12,
2022
Received in revised form:
February 10,
2022
Received:
September 22,
2021
Identification
Copyright
© 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
