Direct comparison of the FibroScan XL and M probes for assessment of liver fibrosis in obese and nonobese patients

Esteban Durango,1,* Christian Dietrich,1,* Helmut Karl Seitz,1 Cornelia Ursula Kunz,2 Gilles T Pomier-Layrargues,3 Andres Duarte-Rojo,4 Melanie Beaton,5 Magdy Elkhashab,6 Robert P Myers,7 Sebastian Mueller1,3 1Department of Medicine and Center for Alcohol Research, Liver Disease and Nutrition, Salem...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Durango E, Dietrich C, Seitz HK, Kunz CU, Pomier-Layrargues GT, Duarte-Rojo A, Beaton M, Elkhashab M, Myers RP, Mueller S
Formato: article
Lenguaje:EN
Publicado: Dove Medical Press 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://doaj.org/article/20a8e48800ad417590e86dd92b513ca3
Etiquetas: Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
id oai:doaj.org-article:20a8e48800ad417590e86dd92b513ca3
record_format dspace
spelling oai:doaj.org-article:20a8e48800ad417590e86dd92b513ca32021-12-02T05:55:37ZDirect comparison of the FibroScan XL and M probes for assessment of liver fibrosis in obese and nonobese patients1179-1535https://doaj.org/article/20a8e48800ad417590e86dd92b513ca32013-07-01T00:00:00Zhttp://www.dovepress.com/direct-comparison-of-the-fibroscan-xl-and-m-probes-for-assessment-of-l-a13562https://doaj.org/toc/1179-1535Esteban Durango,1,* Christian Dietrich,1,* Helmut Karl Seitz,1 Cornelia Ursula Kunz,2 Gilles T Pomier-Layrargues,3 Andres Duarte-Rojo,4 Melanie Beaton,5 Magdy Elkhashab,6 Robert P Myers,7 Sebastian Mueller1,3 1Department of Medicine and Center for Alcohol Research, Liver Disease and Nutrition, Salem Medical Center, 2Institute of Medical Biometry and Informatics, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; 3Liver Unit, Centre Hospitalier de l&#39;Universit&eacute; de Montr&eacute;al, H&ocirc;pital Saint-Luc, Montr&eacute;al, Quebec, 4Toronto Western Hospital Liver Centre, Toronto, Ontario; 5Multi-Organ Transplant Unit, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario; 6The Toronto Liver Centre, Toronto, Ontario; 7Liver Unit, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada *These authors contributed equally to this researchBackground: A novel Fibroscan XL probe has recently been introduced and validated for obese patients, and has a diagnostic accuracy comparable with that of the standard M probe. The aim of this study was to analyze and understand the differences between these two probes in nonobese patients, to identify underlying causes for these differences, and to develop a practical algorithm to translate results for the XL probe to those for the M probe.Methods and results: Both probes were directly compared first in copolymer phantoms of varying stiffness (4.8, 11, and 40 kPa) and then in 371 obese and nonobese patients (body mass index, range 17.2&ndash;72.4) from German (n = 129) and Canadian (n = 242) centers. Liver stiffness values for both probes correlated better in phantoms than in patients (r = 0.98 versus 0.82, P < 0.001). Significantly more patients could be measured successfully using the XL probe than the M probe (98.4% versus 85.2%, respectively, P < 0.001) while the M probe produced a smaller interquartile range (21% versus 32%). Failure of the M probe to measure liver stiffness was not only observed in patients with a high body mass index and long skin-liver capsule distance but also in some nonobese patients (n = 10) due to quenching of the signal from subcutaneous fat tissue. In contrast with the phantoms, the XL probe consistently produced approximately 20% lower liver stiffness values in humans compared with the M probe. A long skin-liver capsule distance and a high degree of steatosis were responsible for this discordance. Adjustment of cutoff values for the XL probe (<5.5, 5.5&ndash;7, 7&ndash;10, and >10 kPa for F0, F1&ndash;2, F3, and F4 fibrosis, respectively) significantly improved agreement between the two probes from r = 0.655 to 0.679.Conclusion: Liver stiffness can be measured in significantly more obese and nonobese patients using the XL probe than the M probe. However, the XL probe is less accurate and adjusted cutoff values are required.Keywords: cirrhosis, liver fibrosis, liver stiffness, obesity, steatosis, transient elastography, M probe, XL probeDurango EDietrich CSeitz HKKunz CUPomier-Layrargues GTDuarte-Rojo ABeaton MElkhashab MMyers RPMueller SDove Medical PressarticleDiseases of the digestive system. GastroenterologyRC799-869ENHepatic Medicine: Evidence and Research, Vol 2013, Iss default, Pp 43-52 (2013)
institution DOAJ
collection DOAJ
language EN
topic Diseases of the digestive system. Gastroenterology
RC799-869
spellingShingle Diseases of the digestive system. Gastroenterology
RC799-869
Durango E
Dietrich C
Seitz HK
Kunz CU
Pomier-Layrargues GT
Duarte-Rojo A
Beaton M
Elkhashab M
Myers RP
Mueller S
Direct comparison of the FibroScan XL and M probes for assessment of liver fibrosis in obese and nonobese patients
description Esteban Durango,1,* Christian Dietrich,1,* Helmut Karl Seitz,1 Cornelia Ursula Kunz,2 Gilles T Pomier-Layrargues,3 Andres Duarte-Rojo,4 Melanie Beaton,5 Magdy Elkhashab,6 Robert P Myers,7 Sebastian Mueller1,3 1Department of Medicine and Center for Alcohol Research, Liver Disease and Nutrition, Salem Medical Center, 2Institute of Medical Biometry and Informatics, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; 3Liver Unit, Centre Hospitalier de l&#39;Universit&eacute; de Montr&eacute;al, H&ocirc;pital Saint-Luc, Montr&eacute;al, Quebec, 4Toronto Western Hospital Liver Centre, Toronto, Ontario; 5Multi-Organ Transplant Unit, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario; 6The Toronto Liver Centre, Toronto, Ontario; 7Liver Unit, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada *These authors contributed equally to this researchBackground: A novel Fibroscan XL probe has recently been introduced and validated for obese patients, and has a diagnostic accuracy comparable with that of the standard M probe. The aim of this study was to analyze and understand the differences between these two probes in nonobese patients, to identify underlying causes for these differences, and to develop a practical algorithm to translate results for the XL probe to those for the M probe.Methods and results: Both probes were directly compared first in copolymer phantoms of varying stiffness (4.8, 11, and 40 kPa) and then in 371 obese and nonobese patients (body mass index, range 17.2&ndash;72.4) from German (n = 129) and Canadian (n = 242) centers. Liver stiffness values for both probes correlated better in phantoms than in patients (r = 0.98 versus 0.82, P < 0.001). Significantly more patients could be measured successfully using the XL probe than the M probe (98.4% versus 85.2%, respectively, P < 0.001) while the M probe produced a smaller interquartile range (21% versus 32%). Failure of the M probe to measure liver stiffness was not only observed in patients with a high body mass index and long skin-liver capsule distance but also in some nonobese patients (n = 10) due to quenching of the signal from subcutaneous fat tissue. In contrast with the phantoms, the XL probe consistently produced approximately 20% lower liver stiffness values in humans compared with the M probe. A long skin-liver capsule distance and a high degree of steatosis were responsible for this discordance. Adjustment of cutoff values for the XL probe (<5.5, 5.5&ndash;7, 7&ndash;10, and >10 kPa for F0, F1&ndash;2, F3, and F4 fibrosis, respectively) significantly improved agreement between the two probes from r = 0.655 to 0.679.Conclusion: Liver stiffness can be measured in significantly more obese and nonobese patients using the XL probe than the M probe. However, the XL probe is less accurate and adjusted cutoff values are required.Keywords: cirrhosis, liver fibrosis, liver stiffness, obesity, steatosis, transient elastography, M probe, XL probe
format article
author Durango E
Dietrich C
Seitz HK
Kunz CU
Pomier-Layrargues GT
Duarte-Rojo A
Beaton M
Elkhashab M
Myers RP
Mueller S
author_facet Durango E
Dietrich C
Seitz HK
Kunz CU
Pomier-Layrargues GT
Duarte-Rojo A
Beaton M
Elkhashab M
Myers RP
Mueller S
author_sort Durango E
title Direct comparison of the FibroScan XL and M probes for assessment of liver fibrosis in obese and nonobese patients
title_short Direct comparison of the FibroScan XL and M probes for assessment of liver fibrosis in obese and nonobese patients
title_full Direct comparison of the FibroScan XL and M probes for assessment of liver fibrosis in obese and nonobese patients
title_fullStr Direct comparison of the FibroScan XL and M probes for assessment of liver fibrosis in obese and nonobese patients
title_full_unstemmed Direct comparison of the FibroScan XL and M probes for assessment of liver fibrosis in obese and nonobese patients
title_sort direct comparison of the fibroscan xl and m probes for assessment of liver fibrosis in obese and nonobese patients
publisher Dove Medical Press
publishDate 2013
url https://doaj.org/article/20a8e48800ad417590e86dd92b513ca3
work_keys_str_mv AT durangoe directcomparisonofthefibroscanxlandmprobesforassessmentofliverfibrosisinobeseandnonobesepatients
AT dietrichc directcomparisonofthefibroscanxlandmprobesforassessmentofliverfibrosisinobeseandnonobesepatients
AT seitzhk directcomparisonofthefibroscanxlandmprobesforassessmentofliverfibrosisinobeseandnonobesepatients
AT kunzcu directcomparisonofthefibroscanxlandmprobesforassessmentofliverfibrosisinobeseandnonobesepatients
AT pomierlayrarguesgt directcomparisonofthefibroscanxlandmprobesforassessmentofliverfibrosisinobeseandnonobesepatients
AT duarterojoa directcomparisonofthefibroscanxlandmprobesforassessmentofliverfibrosisinobeseandnonobesepatients
AT beatonm directcomparisonofthefibroscanxlandmprobesforassessmentofliverfibrosisinobeseandnonobesepatients
AT elkhashabm directcomparisonofthefibroscanxlandmprobesforassessmentofliverfibrosisinobeseandnonobesepatients
AT myersrp directcomparisonofthefibroscanxlandmprobesforassessmentofliverfibrosisinobeseandnonobesepatients
AT muellers directcomparisonofthefibroscanxlandmprobesforassessmentofliverfibrosisinobeseandnonobesepatients
_version_ 1718400158798970880