These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Prospective comparison of spleen and liver stiffness by using shear-wave and transient elastography for detection of portal hypertension in cirrhosis.
    Author: Elkrief L, Rautou PE, Ronot M, Lambert S, Dioguardi Burgio M, Francoz C, Plessier A, Durand F, Valla D, Lebrec D, Vilgrain V, Castéra L.
    Journal: Radiology; 2015 May; 275(2):589-98. PubMed ID: 25469784.
    Abstract:
    PURPOSE: To prospectively compare the technical success rate and accuracy of shear-wave elastography (SWE) and transient elastography (TE) for the detection of clinically significant portal hypertension (PH) in patients with advanced cirrhosis who are undergoing hepatic vein pressure gradient (HVPG) measurements. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The institutional ethics committee approved the study, and written informed consent was obtained. Seventy-nine consecutive patients with cirrhosis who were undergoing SWE and TE at the time of HVPG measurement were studied. The technical success rate of SWE and TE was compared with the diagnostic value of liver stiffness (LS) and spleen stiffness (SS) measurements and composite scores (LS spleen-diameter-to-platelet-ratio score [LSPS] and PH risk score) by using SWE and TE to detect clinically significant PH (HVPG ≥ 10 mm Hg) and esophageal varices at high risk of bleeding. Areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve and the DeLong test were used. RESULTS: The technical success rate of SWE was significantly better than that of TE for both LS and SS (97% and 97% vs 44% and 42%, respectively; P < .001). LS of more than 24.6 kPa with SWE had a sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy for clinically significant PH of 81%, 88%, and 82%, respectively. Diagnostic performance of LS by using SWE was significantly better than that for SS for the diagnosis of clinically significant PH (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.87 vs 0.64, P = .003). LS, SS, LSPS, and PH risk score (according to SWE or TE) did not differ between patients with and those without high-risk esophageal varices (P = .09-.42). CONCLUSION: In patients with advanced cirrhosis who are undergoing HVPG measurements, LS measurements obtained by using SWE have a higher technical success rate and a better diagnostic value than TE for clinically significant PH.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]