ArticleEuropean radiology2019
Inter-platform reproducibility of ultrasonic attenuation and backscatter coefficients in assessing NAFLD.
Article in European radiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.
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
23 citing papers in PubMed.
- Quantitative liver ultrasound: current status and challenges.Ultrasonography (Seoul, Korea) · 2026Article
- Evolving B-mode ultrasound-based techniques for assessing metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease: Now and beyond.Liver research (Beijing, China) · 2026Review
- Ultrasound structure function for quantitative assessment of steatotic liver disease based on total severity score.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2026Article
- Imaging Evaluation for Steatotic Liver Disease.Korean journal of radiology · 2026Review
- Prospective multicenter study on the reproducibility of ultrasound-derived fat fraction in assessing hepatic steatosis.Insights into imaging · 2025Article
- Diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound-derived fat fraction for the detection and quantification of hepatic steatosis in patients with liver biopsy.Journal of medical ultrasonics (2001) · 2025Article
- Interplatform Agreement Between Liver Steatosis Analysis and Ultrasound-Guided Attenuation Parameter in the Evaluation of Hepatic Steatosis.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2025Article
- Reproducibility of ultrasound-derived fat fraction in measuring hepatic steatosis.Insights into imaging · 2024Article
- US Attenuation Coefficient for Liver Fat Quantification: A Need for Standardization.Radiology · 2024Article
- Altered probe pressure and body position increase diagnostic accuracy for men and women in detecting hepatic steatosis using quantitative ultrasound.European radiology · 2024Article
- Inter-platform reproducibility of ultrasound-based fat fraction for evaluating hepatic steatosis in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease.Insights into imaging · 2024Article
- Non-invasive evaluation of liver steatosis with imaging modalities: New techniques and applications.World journal of gastroenterology · 2023Review
- Assessment of the inter-platform reproducibility of ultrasound attenuation examination in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease.Ultrasonography (Seoul, Korea) · 2022Article
- SGLT2 Inhibitors as the Most Promising Influencers on the Outcome of Non-Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Review
- Non-invasive methods for imaging hepatic steatosis and their clinical importance in NAFLD.Nature reviews. Endocrinology · 2022Review
- Quantitative ultrasound imaging of soft biological tissues: a primer for radiologists and medical physicists.Insights into imaging · 2021Review
- Article
- Transfer learning radiomics based on multimodal ultrasound imaging for staging liver fibrosis.European radiology · 2020Article
- Assessment of Hepatic Steatosis in Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease by Using Quantitative US.Radiology · 2020Article
- Quantitative ultrasound approaches for diagnosis and monitoring hepatic steatosis in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease.Theranostics · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo assess inter-platform reproducibility of ultrasonic attenuation coefficient (AC) and backscatter coefficient (BSC) estimates in adults with known/suspected nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD).
methodsThis HIPAA-compliant prospective study was approved by an institutional review board; informed consent was obtained. Participants with known/suspected NAFLD were recruited and underwent same-day liver examinations with clinical ultrasound scanner platforms from two manufacturers. Each participant was scanned by the same trained sonographer who performed multiple data acquisitions in the right liver lobe using a lateral intercostal approach. Each data acquisition recorded a B-mode image and the underlying radio frequency (RF) data. AC and BSC were calculated using the reference phantom method. Inter-platform reproducibility was evaluated for AC and log-transformed BSC (logBSC = 10log
resultsSixty-four participants were enrolled. Mean AC values measured using the two platforms were 0.90 ± 0.13 and 0.94 ± 0.15 dB/cm/MHz while mean logBSC values were - 30.6 ± 5.0 and - 27.9 ± 5.6 dB, respectively. Inter-platform ICC was 0.77 for AC and 0.70 for log-transformed BSC in terms of absolute agreement. Pearson's correlation coefficient was 0.81 for AC and 0.80 for logBSC. Ninety-five percent LOAs were - 0.21 to 0.13 dB/cm/MHz for AC, and - 9.48 to 3.98 dB for logBSC. The wCV was 7% for AC.
conclusionsHepatic AC and BSC are reproducible across two different ultrasound platforms in adults with known or suspected NAFLD. KEY POINTS: • Ultrasonic attenuation coefficient and backscatter coefficient are reproducible between two different ultrasound platforms in adults with NAFLD. • This inter-platform reproducibility may qualify quantitative ultrasound biomarkers for generalized clinical application in patients with suspected/known NAFLD.
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.