Top

Published in:

01-03-2016 | Hepatobiliary-Pancreas

MR elastography of the liver at 3.0 T in diagnosing liver fibrosis grades; preliminary clinical experience

Authors: Kengo Yoshimitsu, Toshimichi Mitsufuji, Yoshinobu Shinagawa, Ritsuko Fujimitsu, Ayako Morita, Hiroshi Urakawa, Hiroyuki Hayashi, Koichi Takano

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 3/2016

Abstract

Objectives

To clarify the usefulness of 3.0-T MR elastography (MRE) in diagnosing the histological grades of liver fibrosis using preliminary clinical data.

Materials and methods

Between November 2012 and March 2014, MRE was applied to all patients who underwent liver MR study at a 3.0-T clinical unit. Among them, those who had pathological evaluation of liver tissue within 3 months from MR examinations were retrospectively recruited, and the liver stiffness measured by MRE was correlated with histological results. Institutional review board approved this study, waiving informed consent.

Results

There were 70 patients who met the inclusion criteria. Liver stiffness showed significant correlation with the pathological grades of liver fibrosis (rho = 0.89, p < 0.0001, Spearman’s rank correlation). Areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve were 0.93, 0.95, 0.99 and 0.95 for fibrosis score greater than or equal to F1, F2, F3 and F4, with cut-off values of 3.13, 3.85, 4.28 and 5.38 kPa, respectively. Multivariate analysis suggested that grades of necroinflammation also affected liver stiffness, but to a significantly lesser degree as compared to fibrosis.

Conclusions

3.0-T clinical MRE was suggested to be sufficiently useful in assessing the grades of liver fibrosis.

Key Points

• MR elastography may help clinicians assess patients with chronic liver diseases

• Usefulness of 3.0-T MR elastography has rarely been reported

• Measured liver stiffness correlated well with the histological grades of liver fibrosis

• Measured liver stiffness was also affected by necroinflammation, but to a lesser degree

• 3.0-T MRE could be a non-invasive alternative to liver biopsy

Martinez SM, Crespo G, Navasa M, Forns X (2011) Noninvasive assessment of liver fibrosis. Hepatology 52:325–335CrossRef

Gpdfrey EM, Mannelli L, Groffin N, Lomas DJ (2013) Magnetic resonance elastography in the diagnosis of hepatic fibrosis. Semin Ultrasound CT MRI 34:81–88CrossRef

Friedrich-Rust M, Hadji-Hosseini H, Kriener S et al (2010) Transient elastography with a new probe for obese patients for non-invasive staging of non-alcoholic steatohepatitis. Eur Radiol 20:2390–2396CrossRefPubMed

Nierhoff J, Chávez Ortiz AA, Herrmann E et al (2013) The efficiency of acoustic radiation force impulse imaging for the staging of liver fibrosis: a meta-analysis. Eur Radiol 23:3040–3053CrossRefPubMed

Zeng J, Liu GJ, Huang ZP et al (2014) Diagnostic accuracy of two-dimensional shear wave elastography for the non-invasive staging of hepatic fibrosis in chronic hepatitis B: a cohort study with internal validation. Eur Radiol 24:2572–2581CrossRefPubMed

Muthupillai R, Lomas DJ, Rossman PJ et al (1995) Magnetic resonance elastography by direct visualization of propagating acoustic strain waves. Science 269:1854–1857CrossRefPubMed

Rouviere O, Yin M, Dresner MA et al (2006) MR elastography of the liver: preliminary results. Radiology 240:440–448CrossRefPubMed

Klatt D, Asbach P, Rump J et al (2006) In vivo determination of hepatic stiffness using steady-state free precession magnetic resonance elastography. Invest Radiol 41:841–848CrossRefPubMed

Huwart L, Sempoux C, Salameh N et al (2007) Liver fibrosis: noninvasive assessment with MR elastography versus aspartate aminotransferase-to-platelet ratio index. Radiology 245:458–466CrossRefPubMed

10.

Yin M, Talwalker JA, Glaser KJ et al (2007) A preliminary assessment of hepatic fibrosis with magnetic resonance elastography. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 5:1207–1213PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

11.

Huwart L, Sempoux C, Vicaut E et al (2008) Magnetic resonance elastography for the noninvasive staging of liver fibrosis. Gastroenterology 135:32–40CrossRefPubMed

12.

Motosugi U, Ichikawa T, Sou H et al (2010) Magnetic resonance elastography of the liver: preliminary results and estimation of interrater reliability. Jpn J Radiol 28:623–627PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

13.

Asbach P, Klatt D, Schlosser B et al (2010) Viscoelasticity-based staging of hepatic fibrosis with multifrequency MR elastography. Radiology 257:80–86CrossRefPubMed

14.

Hines CDG, Bley TA, Lindstrom MJ, Reeder SB (2010) Repeatability of magnetic resonance elastography for quantification of hepatic stiffness. J Magn Reson Imaging 31:725–731PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

15.

Shire NJ, Yi M, Chen J et al (2011) Test–retest repeatability of MR elastography for noninvasive liver fibrosis assessment in hepatitis C. J Magn Reson Imaging 34:947–955PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

16.

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 34:1110–1116CrossRefPubMed

17.

Lee DH, Lee JM, Han JK, Choi BI (2013) MR elastography of healthy liver parenchyma: normal value and reliability of the liver stiffness value measurement. J Magn Reson Imaging 38:1215–1223CrossRefPubMed

18.

Wang Y, Ganger DR, Levitsky J et al (2011) Assessment of chronic hepatitis and fibrosis: comparison of MR elastography and diffusion-weighted imaging. AJR 196:553–561PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

19.

Ichikawa S, Motosugi U, Ichikawa T et al (2012) Magnetic resonance elastography for staging liver fibrosis in chronic hepatitis C. Magn Reson Med Sci 11:291–297CrossRefPubMed

20.

Mannelli L, Godfrey E, Graves MJ et al (2012) Magnetic resonance elastography : feasibility of liver stiffness measurement in healthy volunteers at 3T. Clin Radiol 67:258–262CrossRefPubMed

21.

Shi Y, Guo Q, Xia F, Sun J, Gao Y (2014) Short- and midterm repeatability of magnetic resonance elastography in healthy volunteers at 3.0T. Magn Reson Imaging 32:665–670CrossRefPubMed

22.

Shi Y, Guo Q, Xia F et al (2014) MR elastography for the assessment of hepatic fibrosis in patients with chronic hepatitis B infection: does histologic necroinflammation influence the measurement of hepatic stiffness? Radiology 273:88–98PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

23.

Bohte AE, Niet A, Jansen L et al (2014) 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 24:638–648CrossRefPubMed

24.

Mitsufuji T, Shinagawa Y, Fujimitsu R et al (2013) Measurement repeatability of MR elastography at 3.0T: comparison among three different region-of-interest placement methods. Jpn J Radiol 31:336–341CrossRefPubMed

25.

Shinagawa Y, Mitsufiji T, Morimoto S et al (2014) Optimization of scanning parameters for MR elastography at 3.0 T clinical unit: volunteer study. Jpn J Radiol 32:441–446CrossRefPubMed

26.

Venkatesh SK, Yin M, Ehman RL (2013) Magnetic resonance elastography of liver: technique, analysis, and clinical application. J Magn Reson Imaging 37:544–555PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

27.

Silva AC, Walker FB, Vargas HE, Jatoi MA, Ehman RL (2008) Diffuse liver disease: virtual palpation with MR elastography. In: Proceedings of the Radiological Society of North America 93rd scientific assembly and annual meeting, Chicago, IL

28.

The French METAVIR Cooperative Study Group (1994) Intraobserver and interobserver variations in liver biopsy interpretation inpatients with chronic hepatitis C. Hepatology 20:15–20CrossRef

29.

Bedossa P (1996) An algorithm for the grading of activity in chronic hepatitis C. Hepatology 24:289–293CrossRefPubMed

30.

Foucher J, Chanteloup E, Vergniol J et al (2006) Diagnosis of cirrhosis by transient elastography (FibroScan): a prospective study. Gut 55:403–408PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

31.

Brunt EM (2000) Grading and staging the histopathological lesions of chronic hepatitis: the Knodell histology activity index and beyond. Hepatology 31:241–246CrossRefPubMed

32.

Yoon KT, Lim SM, Park JY et al (2012) Liver stiffness measurement using acoustic radiation force impulse (ARFI) elastography and effect of necroinflammation. Dig Dis Sci 57:1682–1691CrossRefPubMed

33.

Kim SU, Kim JK, Park YN, Han KH (2012) Discordance between liver biopsy and Fibroscan® in assessing liver fibrosis in chronic hepatitis B: risk factors and influence of necroinflammation. PLoS ONE 7, e32233PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

34.

Watanabe H, Kanematsu M, Kitagawa T et al (2010) MR elastography of the liver with cine-tagging and bending energy analysis: preliminary results. Eur Radiol 20:2381–2389CrossRefPubMed

35.

Chung S, Betron E, Mannelli L, Axel L (2011) Liver stiffness assessment by tagged MRI of cardiac-induced liver motion. Magn Reson Med 65:949–955PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

36.

Mannelli L, Wilson GJ, Dubinsky TJ et al (2012) Assessment of the liver strain among cirrhotic and normal livers using tagged MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 36:1490–1495CrossRefPubMed

Title: MR elastography of the liver at 3.0 T in diagnosing liver fibrosis grades; preliminary clinical experience
Authors: Kengo Yoshimitsu
Toshimichi Mitsufuji
Yoshinobu Shinagawa
Ritsuko Fujimitsu
Ayako Morita
Hiroshi Urakawa
Hiroyuki Hayashi
Koichi Takano
Publication date: 01-03-2016
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: European Radiology / Issue 3/2016
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-015-3863-4

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

MR elastography of the liver at 3.0 T in diagnosing liver fibrosis grades; preliminary clinical experience

Abstract

Objectives

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusions

Key Points

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Objectives

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusions

Key Points

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 3/2016

MRI in multiple sclerosis: an intra-individual, randomized and multicentric comparison of gadobutrol with gadoterate meglumine at 3 T

25 years of European Radiology

Dynamic multidetector CT and non-contrast-enhanced MR for right adrenal vein imaging: comparison with catheter venography in adrenal venous sampling

Injuries of the scapholunate and lunotriquetral ligaments as well as the TFCC in intra-articular distal radius fractures. Prevalence assessed with MDCT arthrography

Polymer film-nanoparticle composites as new multimodality, non-migrating breast biopsy markers