Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Abdominal Radiology 2/2014

01-04-2014

Comparison of interobserver agreement of magnetic resonance elastography with histopathological staging of liver fibrosis

Authors: Jurgen H. Runge, Anneloes E. Bohte, Joanne Verheij, Valeska Terpstra, Aart J. Nederveen, Karin M. J. van Nieuwkerk, Rob J. de Knegt, Bert C. Baak, Peter L. M. Jansen, Ralph Sinkus, Jaap Stoker

Published in: Abdominal Radiology | Issue 2/2014

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

MR elastography (MRE) can serve as an accurate surrogate marker of liver fibrosis. For any diagnostic test that is to replace the current reference standard, interobserver agreement should be at least as good and preferably better. The objective of this study was to perform a head-to-head comparison of the interobserver agreements of MRE and liver fibrosis staging on biopsy in a single cohort of hepatitis patients.

Methods

One hundred and three patients with viral hepatitis B or C who had a liver biopsy underwent MRE. Two readers independently selected a region-of-interest (ROI) in the liver to derive elasticity values. Two pathologists first independently staged fibrosis on biopsies using the METAVIR classification and subsequently held a consensus meeting. Interobserver agreements of elasticity values and fibrosis stages were assessed with intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC).

Results

MRE and biopsy data were available for 85/103 patients. ICC of pathologists staging fibrosis was almost perfect at 0.91 (95% CI 0.86–0.94). ICC for MRE readers was significantly (P < 0.0001) higher at 0.99 (95% CI 0.98–1.00).

Conclusions

Interobserver agreement for liver fibrosis staging was almost perfect for both histopathology and MRE, with a significant higher agreement for MRE. Its high interobserver agreement and reliable accuracy support the use of MRE as a non-invasive screening tool for liver fibrosis.
Literature
6.
go back to reference Lee DH, Lee JM, Han JK, Choi BI (2012) MR elastography of healthy liver parenchyma: Normal value and reliability of the liver stiffness value measurement. J Magn Reson Imaging 38(5):1215–1223. doi:10.1002/jmri.23958 PubMedCrossRef Lee DH, Lee JM, Han JK, Choi BI (2012) MR elastography of healthy liver parenchyma: Normal value and reliability of the liver stiffness value measurement. J Magn Reson Imaging 38(5):1215–1223. doi:10.​1002/​jmri.​23958 PubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference Kim BH, Lee JM, Lee YJ, et al. (2011) MR elastography for noninvasive assessment of hepatic fibrosis: experience from a tertiary center in Asia. J Magn Reson Imaging 34(5):1110–1116. doi:10.1002/jmri.22723 PubMedCrossRef Kim BH, Lee JM, Lee YJ, et al. (2011) MR elastography for noninvasive assessment of hepatic fibrosis: experience from a tertiary center in Asia. J Magn Reson Imaging 34(5):1110–1116. doi:10.​1002/​jmri.​22723 PubMedCrossRef
11.
go back to reference Bohte AE, de Niet A, Jansen L, et al. (2013) Non-invasive evaluation of liver fibrosis: a comparison of ultrasound-based transient elastography and MR elastography in patients with viral hepatitis B and C. Eur Radiol. doi:10.1007/s00330-013-3046-0 Bohte AE, de Niet A, Jansen L, et al. (2013) Non-invasive evaluation of liver fibrosis: a comparison of ultrasound-based transient elastography and MR elastography in patients with viral hepatitis B and C. Eur Radiol. doi:10.​1007/​s00330-013-3046-0
13.
go back to reference The French METAVIR Cooperative Study Group (1994) Intraobserver and interobserver variations in liver biopsy interpretation in patients with chronic hepatitis C. Hepatology 20(1 Pt 1):15–20CrossRef The French METAVIR Cooperative Study Group (1994) Intraobserver and interobserver variations in liver biopsy interpretation in patients with chronic hepatitis C. Hepatology 20(1 Pt 1):15–20CrossRef
16.
19.
go back to reference Ishak K, Baptista A, Bianchi L, et al. (1995) Histological grading and staging of chronic hepatitis. J Hepatol 22:696–699PubMedCrossRef Ishak K, Baptista A, Bianchi L, et al. (1995) Histological grading and staging of chronic hepatitis. J Hepatol 22:696–699PubMedCrossRef
20.
go back to reference Sinkus R, Siegmann K, Xydeas T, et al. (2007) MR elastography of breast lesions: understanding the solid/liquid duality can improve the specificity of contrast-enhanced MR mammography. Magn Reson Med 58(6):1135–1144. doi:10.1002/mrm.21404 PubMedCrossRef Sinkus R, Siegmann K, Xydeas T, et al. (2007) MR elastography of breast lesions: understanding the solid/liquid duality can improve the specificity of contrast-enhanced MR mammography. Magn Reson Med 58(6):1135–1144. doi:10.​1002/​mrm.​21404 PubMedCrossRef
21.
go back to reference Norman GR, Streiner DL (2008) Biostatistics: the bare essentials. Shelton: People’s Medical Pub. House Norman GR, Streiner DL (2008) Biostatistics: the bare essentials. Shelton: People’s Medical Pub. House
23.
go back to reference Landis JR, Koch GG (1977) The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33(1):159–174PubMedCrossRef Landis JR, Koch GG (1977) The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33(1):159–174PubMedCrossRef
27.
go back to reference Sturm N, Marlu A, Arvers P, Zarski JP, Leroy V (2013) Comparative assessment of liver fibrosis by computerized morphometry in naive patients with chronic hepatitis B and C. Liver Int 33(3):428–438. doi:10.1111/liv.12092 PubMedCrossRef Sturm N, Marlu A, Arvers P, Zarski JP, Leroy V (2013) Comparative assessment of liver fibrosis by computerized morphometry in naive patients with chronic hepatitis B and C. Liver Int 33(3):428–438. doi:10.​1111/​liv.​12092 PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Comparison of interobserver agreement of magnetic resonance elastography with histopathological staging of liver fibrosis
Authors
Jurgen H. Runge
Anneloes E. Bohte
Joanne Verheij
Valeska Terpstra
Aart J. Nederveen
Karin M. J. van Nieuwkerk
Rob J. de Knegt
Bert C. Baak
Peter L. M. Jansen
Ralph Sinkus
Jaap Stoker
Publication date
01-04-2014
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Abdominal Radiology / Issue 2/2014
Print ISSN: 2366-004X
Electronic ISSN: 2366-0058
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-013-0063-z

Other articles of this Issue 2/2014

Abdominal Radiology 2/2014 Go to the issue