Prospective Comparison of Transient Elastography Using Two Different Devices: Performance of FibroScan and FibroTouch

Joao Tiago Serra, Johannes Mueller, Haidong Teng, Omar Elshaarawy, Sebastian Mueller Center for Alcohol Research, University of Heidelberg and Salem Medical Center, Heidelberg, Baden-Württemberg, GermanyCorrespondence: Sebastian MuellerCenter for Alcohol Research, Salem Medical Center, Univ...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Serra JT, Mueller J, Teng H, Elshaarawy O, Mueller S
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Dove Medical Press 2020
Materias:	fibrosis cirrhosis steatosis transient elastography liver stiffness controlled attenuation parameter Diseases of the digestive system. Gastroenterology RC799-869
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/0dfbd2882ed74d2e9bdb00cff943e584
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:0dfbd2882ed74d2e9bdb00cff943e584
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:0dfbd2882ed74d2e9bdb00cff943e5842021-12-02T11:32:14ZProspective Comparison of Transient Elastography Using Two Different Devices: Performance of FibroScan and FibroTouch1179-1535https://doaj.org/article/0dfbd2882ed74d2e9bdb00cff943e5842020-03-01T00:00:00Zhttps://www.dovepress.com/prospective-comparison-of-transient-elastography-using-two-different-d-peer-reviewed-article-HMERhttps://doaj.org/toc/1179-1535Joao Tiago Serra, Johannes Mueller, Haidong Teng, Omar Elshaarawy, Sebastian Mueller Center for Alcohol Research, University of Heidelberg and Salem Medical Center, Heidelberg, Baden-Württemberg, GermanyCorrespondence: Sebastian MuellerCenter for Alcohol Research, Salem Medical Center, University of Heidelberg, Zeppelinstraße 11 – 33, Heidelberg 69121, GermanyTel +49 6221 483 210Fax +49 6221 483 494Email sebastian.mueller@urz.uni-heidelberg.dePurpose: Transient elastography (TE) using FibroScan (FS) has been established to non-invasively assess liver fibrosis and steatosis. The aim of this study was to compare the recently introduced FibroTouch (FT) device with the established FS with respect to liver stiffness and CAP.Patients and Methods: Thirty-nine patients with and without liver disease were included. All patients were measured three times with FS (FibroScan 530 compact, Echosens, France) and FT (FibroTouch-FT100, Wuxi Hisky Med, China). For FS, M and XL probe were used according to the manufacturer’s specifications. For steatosis, CAP and the comparable FT equivalent UAP (ultrasound attenuation parameter) was determined. Finally, FT and FS were explored in liver tissue-mimicking phantoms.Results: LS between FS and FT correlated well with r=0.91. Root-mean-square (RMS) of the coefficient of variation for LS was better in FS (11.1% vs 27.4%). Bland-Altman analysis showed a 3.1 kPa mean overestimation of LS by FT. In addition, UAP strongly and linearly depended on the BMI following UAP=3.02 × BMI+186. In phantoms, a similar relation was found with UAP (phantom)= 3.78 × BMI + 146 suggesting that UAP is directly calculated from entered BMI instead of assessing shear-wave attenuation. Consequently, RMS-CV was lower for FT (6.0% vs 9.7%). However, if using different BMI, CV-RMS for FT increased to 12.7%. LS of a patient with manifest liver cirrhosis and ascites was 38.8 kPa using the FS-XL probe but almost normal with FT (7.2 kPa).Conclusion: Although LS by FT shows good correlation with LS-FS, it has larger variation, continuously overestimates LS and completely fails in ascites. Moreover, FT-UAP seems to be a misleading parameter for steatosis assessment because it is at least in part calculated from mandatory entered patient data. In conclusion, novel LS cut-off values need to be defined for LS-FT and usage of UAP is not recommended.Keywords: fibrosis, cirrhosis, steatosis, transient elastography, liver stiffness, controlled attenuation parameterSerra JTMueller JTeng HElshaarawy OMueller SDove Medical Pressarticlefibrosiscirrhosissteatosistransient elastographyliver stiffnesscontrolled attenuation parameterDiseases of the digestive system. GastroenterologyRC799-869ENHepatic Medicine: Evidence and Research, Vol Volume 12, Pp 41-48 (2020)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	fibrosis cirrhosis steatosis transient elastography liver stiffness controlled attenuation parameter Diseases of the digestive system. Gastroenterology RC799-869
spellingShingle	fibrosis cirrhosis steatosis transient elastography liver stiffness controlled attenuation parameter Diseases of the digestive system. Gastroenterology RC799-869 Serra JT Mueller J Teng H Elshaarawy O Mueller S Prospective Comparison of Transient Elastography Using Two Different Devices: Performance of FibroScan and FibroTouch
description	Joao Tiago Serra, Johannes Mueller, Haidong Teng, Omar Elshaarawy, Sebastian Mueller Center for Alcohol Research, University of Heidelberg and Salem Medical Center, Heidelberg, Baden-Württemberg, GermanyCorrespondence: Sebastian MuellerCenter for Alcohol Research, Salem Medical Center, University of Heidelberg, Zeppelinstraße 11 – 33, Heidelberg 69121, GermanyTel +49 6221 483 210Fax +49 6221 483 494Email sebastian.mueller@urz.uni-heidelberg.dePurpose: Transient elastography (TE) using FibroScan (FS) has been established to non-invasively assess liver fibrosis and steatosis. The aim of this study was to compare the recently introduced FibroTouch (FT) device with the established FS with respect to liver stiffness and CAP.Patients and Methods: Thirty-nine patients with and without liver disease were included. All patients were measured three times with FS (FibroScan 530 compact, Echosens, France) and FT (FibroTouch-FT100, Wuxi Hisky Med, China). For FS, M and XL probe were used according to the manufacturer’s specifications. For steatosis, CAP and the comparable FT equivalent UAP (ultrasound attenuation parameter) was determined. Finally, FT and FS were explored in liver tissue-mimicking phantoms.Results: LS between FS and FT correlated well with r=0.91. Root-mean-square (RMS) of the coefficient of variation for LS was better in FS (11.1% vs 27.4%). Bland-Altman analysis showed a 3.1 kPa mean overestimation of LS by FT. In addition, UAP strongly and linearly depended on the BMI following UAP=3.02 × BMI+186. In phantoms, a similar relation was found with UAP (phantom)= 3.78 × BMI + 146 suggesting that UAP is directly calculated from entered BMI instead of assessing shear-wave attenuation. Consequently, RMS-CV was lower for FT (6.0% vs 9.7%). However, if using different BMI, CV-RMS for FT increased to 12.7%. LS of a patient with manifest liver cirrhosis and ascites was 38.8 kPa using the FS-XL probe but almost normal with FT (7.2 kPa).Conclusion: Although LS by FT shows good correlation with LS-FS, it has larger variation, continuously overestimates LS and completely fails in ascites. Moreover, FT-UAP seems to be a misleading parameter for steatosis assessment because it is at least in part calculated from mandatory entered patient data. In conclusion, novel LS cut-off values need to be defined for LS-FT and usage of UAP is not recommended.Keywords: fibrosis, cirrhosis, steatosis, transient elastography, liver stiffness, controlled attenuation parameter
format	article
author	Serra JT Mueller J Teng H Elshaarawy O Mueller S
author_facet	Serra JT Mueller J Teng H Elshaarawy O Mueller S
author_sort	Serra JT
title	Prospective Comparison of Transient Elastography Using Two Different Devices: Performance of FibroScan and FibroTouch
title_short	Prospective Comparison of Transient Elastography Using Two Different Devices: Performance of FibroScan and FibroTouch
title_full	Prospective Comparison of Transient Elastography Using Two Different Devices: Performance of FibroScan and FibroTouch
title_fullStr	Prospective Comparison of Transient Elastography Using Two Different Devices: Performance of FibroScan and FibroTouch
title_full_unstemmed	Prospective Comparison of Transient Elastography Using Two Different Devices: Performance of FibroScan and FibroTouch
title_sort	prospective comparison of transient elastography using two different devices: performance of fibroscan and fibrotouch
publisher	Dove Medical Press
publishDate	2020
url	https://doaj.org/article/0dfbd2882ed74d2e9bdb00cff943e584
work_keys_str_mv	AT serrajt prospectivecomparisonoftransientelastographyusingtwodifferentdevicesperformanceoffibroscanandfibrotouch AT muellerj prospectivecomparisonoftransientelastographyusingtwodifferentdevicesperformanceoffibroscanandfibrotouch AT tengh prospectivecomparisonoftransientelastographyusingtwodifferentdevicesperformanceoffibroscanandfibrotouch AT elshaarawyo prospectivecomparisonoftransientelastographyusingtwodifferentdevicesperformanceoffibroscanandfibrotouch AT muellers prospectivecomparisonoftransientelastographyusingtwodifferentdevicesperformanceoffibroscanandfibrotouch
_version_	1718395803183087616

Prospective Comparison of Transient Elastography Using Two Different Devices: Performance of FibroScan and FibroTouch

Ejemplares similares