ArticleUltrasonography (Seoul, Korea)2020
Comparison of point and 2-dimensional shear wave elastography for the evaluation of liver fibrosis.
Article in Ultrasonography (Seoul, Korea), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Ultrasound elastography in chronic kidney disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of medical ultrasonics (2001) · 2023Pooled it
- Ultrasound shear wave elastography - a reliable protocol for the assessment of the stiffness of the supraspinatus tendon.Shoulder & elbow · 2025Article
- Management of metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD)-An expert consensus statement from Indian diabetologists' perspective.Diabetes, obesity & metabolism · 2025Review
- Application of a quality threshold to improve liver shear wave elastography measurements in free-breathing pediatric patients.Ultrasonography (Seoul, Korea) · 2024Article
- 2D shear wave elastography for the assessment of quadriceps entheses-a methodological study.Skeletal radiology · 2024Article
- Comparison between Two-Dimensional and Point Shear Wave Elastography Techniques in Evaluating Liver Fibrosis Using Histological Staging as the Reference Standard: A Prospective Pilot Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Ultrasound shear wave elastography for the evaluation of renal pathological changes in adult patients.The British journal of radiology · 2023Review
- Evaluation of ultrasound point shear wave elastography reliability in an elasticity phantom.Ultrasonography (Seoul, Korea) · 2022Article
- Comparison of superb microvascular imaging and shear wave elastography for assessing liver fibrosis in chronic hepatitis B.Ultrasonography (Seoul, Korea) · 2022Article
- Effects of Confounding Factors on Liver Stiffness in Two-Dimensional Shear Wave Elastography in Beagle Dogs.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2022Article
- Non-invasive tools for detection of liver disease in children and adolescents with cystic fibrosis.Translational pediatrics · 2021Article
- Liver stiffness quantification in biopsy-proven nonalcoholic fatty liver disease patients using shear wave elastography in comparison with transient elastography.Ultrasonography (Seoul, Korea) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThis study aimed to assess the technical performance of ElastQ Imaging compared with ElastPQ and to investigate the correlation between liver stiffness (LS) values obtained using these two techniques.
methodsThis retrospective study included 249 patients who underwent LS measurements using both ElastPQ and ElastQ Imaging equipped on the same machine. The applicability, repeatability (coefficient of variation [CV]), acquisition time, and LS values were compared using the chi-square or Wilcoxon signed-rank tests. In the development group, the correlation between the LS values obtained by the two techniques was assessed with Spearman correlation coefficients and linear regression analysis. In the validation group, the agreement between the estimated and real LS values was evaluated using a Bland-Altman plot.
resultsElastQ Imaging had higher applicability (94.0% vs. 78.3%, P<0.001) and higher repeatability, with a lower median CV (0.127 vs. 0.164, P<0.001) than did ElastPQ. The median acquisition time of ElastQ Imaging was significantly shorter than that of ElastPQ (45.5 seconds vs. 96.5 seconds, P<0.001). The median LS value obtained using ElastQ Imaging was significantly higher than that obtained using ElastPQ (5.60 kPa vs. 5.23 kPa, P<0.001). The LS values between the two techniques exhibited a strong positive correlation (r=0.851, P<0.001) in the development group. The mean difference and 95% limits of agreement were 0.0 kPa (-3.9 to 3.9 kPa) in the validation group.
conclusionElastQ Imaging may be more reliable and faster than ElastPQ, with strongly correlated LS measurements.
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.