Extracellular volume by dual-energy CT, hepatic reserve capacity scoring, CT volumetry, and transient elastography for estimating liver fibrosis
Mariko Mizuno,Kenichiro Tago,Masahiro Okada,Yujiro Nakazawa,Takayuki Arakane,Hiroki Yoshikawa,Hayato Abe,Naoki Matsumoto,Tokio Higaki,Yukiyasu Okamura,Tadatoshi Takayama
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-49362-0
IF: 4.6
2023-12-12
Scientific Reports
Abstract:Abstract Our purpose was to compare the efficacy of liver and splenic volumetry (LV and SV), extracellular volume (ECV) on dual-layer spectral-detector CT scoring systems for estimating liver fibrosis (LF) in 45 patients with pathologically staged LF. ECV measured on CT value (HU-ECV), iodine density (ID-ECV), atomic number (Zeff-ECV), and electron density (ED-ECV), LV or SV/body surface area (BSA), albumin bilirubin grade (ALBI), model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score, aspartate aminotransferase platelet ratio index (APRI), and fibrosis index based on the four factors (FIB-4) were recorded. Transient elastography was measured in 22 patients, and compared to ECV. No correlation was found between transient elastography and all ECVs. Area under the curve (AUC) for estimating F4 on transient elastography was 0.885 (95% CI 0.745–1.000). ALBI was weakly associated with LF ( p = 0.451), while MELD ( p < 0.001), APRI ( p = 0.010), and FIB-4 ( p = 0.010) were significantly associated with LF. SV/BSA had a higher AUC than MELD, APRI, and FIB-4 for estimating F4 (AUC = 0.815, 95% CI 0.63–0.999), but MELD (AUC = 0.799, 95% CI 0.634–0.965), APRI (AUC = 0.722, 95% CI 0.561–0.883), and FIB-4 (AUC = 0.741, 95% CI 0.582–0.899) had higher AUCs than ALBI. SV/BSA significantly contributed to differentiation for estimating F4; odds ratio (OR) was 1.304–1.353 (Reader 1–2; R1–R2), whereas MELD significantly contributed to the differentiation between F0–2 and F3–4; OR was 1.528–1.509 (R1–R2). AUC for SV/BSA and MELD combined was 0.877 (95% CI 0.748–1.000). In conclusion, SV/BSA allows for a higher estimation of liver cirrhosis (F4). MELD is more suitable for assessing severe LF (≥ F3–4). The combination of SV/BSA and MELD had a higher AUC than SV/BSA alone for liver cirrhosis (F4).
multidisciplinary sciences