Format

Send to

Choose Destination
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2012 Mar;35(3):607-10. doi: 10.1002/jmri.22845. Epub 2011 Oct 14.

Cross-validation of MR elastography and ultrasound transient elastography in liver stiffness measurement: discrepancy in the results of cirrhotic liver.

Author information

1
Department of Radiology, University of Yamanashi, Yamanashi, Japan. utaroh-motosugi@nifty.com

Abstract

PURPOSE:

To evaluate individual differences in liver stiffness measurement using both MR elastography (MRE) and ultrasound transient elastography (UTE) in patients with chronic liver disease.

MATERIALS AND METHODS:

This study included 80 patients with chronic liver disease who underwent both UTE and MRE. MRE and UTE were performed using a pneumatic driver (60 Hz) and an ultrasound probe with a vibrator (50 Hz), respectively. Liver stiffness data measured using the two techniques (μ(UTE) and μ(MRE) ) were compared with respect to shear modulus. The patients were subdivided into four quartiles on the basis of average of the μ(UTE) and μ(MRE) values for each patient.

RESULTS:

The analysis of the 4 quartile groups revealed that μ(UTE) was significantly higher than μ(MRE) in the two most stiff liver groups: μ(UTE) versus μ(MRE) , 7.5 (1.2) versus 6.0 (0.72) kPa for the group with [μ(UTE) + μ(MRE) ]/2 of 5.6-8.0 kPa; 15.1(4.2) versus 6.7 (1.4) kPa for the group with >8.0 kPa. However, in the least stiff liver group (i.e., the group with [μ(UTE) + μ(MRE) ]/2 < 3.2 kPa), μ(UTE) was significantly lower than μ(MRE) .

CONCLUSION:

The shear modulus measured by UTE and MRE are not equivalent, especially in patients with stiff livers.

PMID:
22002910
DOI:
10.1002/jmri.22845
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Wiley
Loading ...
Support Center