ArticleDigestive diseases and sciences2026
EUS-Guided Shear Wave Elastography in a Real-World Cohort: Diagnostic Accuracy and the Impact of Measurement Variability.
Article in Digestive diseases and sciences, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLiver stiffness measurement (LSM) is a non-invasive surrogate for hepatic fibrosis that informs risk stratification and management. Vibration-controlled transient elastography (VCTE; FibroScan®) is well established. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided shear wave elastography (EUS-SWE) offers the potential to assess LSM during routine EUS; however, its diagnostic performance remains uncertain.
methodsIn this prospective, single-center diagnostic accuracy study, consecutive adults without biliary obstruction who were undergoing EUS additionally underwent LSM measurement from the right hepatic lobe using EUS-SWE (Olympus ME3) and same-day VCTE. VCTE thresholds defined advanced chronic liver disease (ACLD; > 15 kPa), cirrhosis (> 12 kPa), and advanced fibrosis (> 8 kPa). EUS-SWE performance was evaluated using correlation, Bland-Altman agreement, and area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUROC).
resultsAmong 146 patients (median VCTE-LSM 6.05 kPa, range 3-53.3), 57, 41, and 31 had LSM ≥ 8, ≥ 12, and ≥ 15 kPa, respectively. EUS-SWE showed moderate correlation with VCTE (Spearman ρ = 0.65, p < 0.001) and reported higher values by 34.1% (95% limits of agreement:-64.8% to 133.1%) without proportional bias on Bland-Altman analysis. EUS-SWE showed excellent accuracy for screening relevant VCTE-LSM thresholds with AUROC (95% CI) 0.89 (0.81-0.97) for ACLD, 0.89 (0.82-0.96) for cirrhosis, and 0.85 (0.79-0.92) for advanced fibrosis. Optimal EUS-SWE threshold for VCTE-defined ACLD was 12.9 kPa (sensitivity 93%, specificity 77%), representing the optimal screening cutoff; a regression-derived threshold of 21.4 kPa (sensitivity 67%, specificity 93%) represents the mathematical equivalent EUS-SWE value to VCTE ≥ 15 kPa, appropriate for direct modality comparison. Accuracy for ACLD declined monotonously with increasing variability (IQR/LSM%): AUROC 0.97 (for < 30%), 0.86 (30-45%), 0.83 (45-60%), and 0.78 (≥ 60%).
conclusionEUS-SWE yields LSM values approximately 34% higher than VCTE-LSM; the two modalities are not interchangeable and require modality-specific thresholds. EUS-SWE provides accurate prediction of VCTE-defined fibrosis thresholds, particularly when IQR/LSM% ≤ 45%, and represents a promising adjunct for opportunistic liver stiffness assessment during routine EUS.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42509397What 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.