ArticleWorld journal of gastroenterology2014
Study of detection times for liver stiffness evaluation by shear wave elastography.
Article in World journal of gastroenterology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Diagnostic Accuracy of Real-Time Shear Wave Elastography for Staging of Liver Fibrosis: A Meta-Analysis.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2016Pooled it
- Methodological Study to Investigate the Potential of Ultrasound-Based Elastography and Texture as Biomarkers to Monitor Liver Tumors.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Deep residual nets model for staging liver fibrosis on plain CT images.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2020Article
- Shear wave elastography correlates with liver fibrosis scores in pediatric patients with liver disease.Pediatric radiology · 2019Article
- Article
- Evaluation of liver parenchyma stiffness in patients with liver tumours: optimal strategy for shear wave elastography.European radiology · 2019Article
- Can Nonfibrotic Nonalcoholic Steatohepatitis Be Effectively Identified by Supersonic Shear Imaging?Analytical cellular pathology (Amsterdam) · 2019Article
- 2D shear wave elastography combined with MELD improved prognostic accuracy in patients with acute-on-chronic hepatitis B liver failure.European radiology · 2018Article
- Accurate measurements of liver stiffness using shear wave elastography in children and young adults and the role of the stability index.Ultrasonography (Seoul, Korea) · 2018Article
- Comparison of shear wave velocities on ultrasound elastography between different machines, transducers, and acquisition depths: a phantom study.European radiology · 2016Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo investigate enough valid measurements (VMs) to assess liver fibrosis in chronic hepatitis B patients (CHB).
methodsOne hundred and twelve CHB patients (25 women, 87 men) with a mean age of 38.43 years received liver stiffness evaluations using real-time shear wave elastography for 10 VMs. All patients underwent liver biopsy. Based on the biopsy pathology, the liver stiffness data obtained from different VMs (1, 2, 3, 5 and 10 times) were compared for the evaluation of liver fibrosis. The correlation between the elastic modulus means of the liver obtained from different VMs of detection at each pathological stage was analysed. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was employed to determine the diagnostic performance of different VMs of detection, and the areas under the ROC curve of different groups were compared.
resultsThe liver stiffness values obtained from 1 VM, 2 VMs, 3 VMs, 5 VMs and all 10 VMs for stage F0 were 6.95 ± 2.01 kPa, 6.87 ± 1.83 kPa, 6.90 ± 1.88 kPa, 6.95 ± 1.93 kPa and 7.15 ± 1.89 kPa, respectively (F = 0.043, P = 0.996). For stage F1, these values were 7.12 ± 1.72 kPa, 7.24 ± 1.72 kPa, 7.21 ± 1.74 kPa, 7.10 ± 1.78 kPa and 7.04 ± 1.70 kPa, respectively (F = 0.075, P = 0.990). For stage F2, they were 9.37 ± 3.87 kPa, 9.18 ± 3.68 kPa, 9.19 ± 3.81 kPa, 9.18 ± 3.81 kPa and 9.19 ± 3.53 kPa, respectively (F = 0.012, P = 1.000). For stage F3, these were 11.91 ± 3.88 kPa, 11.78 ± 4.04 kPa, 11.83 ± 4.07 kPa, 11.94 ± 4.17 kPa and 12.00 ± 4.02 kPa, respectively (F = 0.010, P = 1.000). For stage F4, the readings were 19.30 ± 7.63 kPa, 19.40 ± 7.36 kPa, 19.54 ± 7.43 kPa, 19.73 ± 7.21 kPa and 20.25 ± 7.22 kPa, respectively (F = 0.054, P = 0.995). There were no significant differences between these groups. Intraclass correlation coefficients among different pathological stages (F0-F4) with different detection VMs were 0.995, 0.993, 0.996, 0.994 and 0.996, respectively. The mean elasticity values from 1 VM, 2 VMs, 3 VMs, 5 VMs and 10 VMs can accurately distinguish fibrosis stages (F0 vs F1234, F01 vs F234, F012 vs F34 and F0123 vs F4) with no significant differences in the five groups (P > 0.05 for all).
conclusionOne VM may be sufficient to assess liver fibrosis by using SWE without any significant loss of accuracy in patients with CHB. However, future studies of larger patient samples are necessary for the validation of this method.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.