Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Aug 12:12:20406223211033119.
doi: 10.1177/20406223211033119. eCollection 2021.

Steatosis grading consistency between controlled attenuation parameter and MRI-PDFF in monitoring metabolic associated fatty liver disease

Affiliations

Steatosis grading consistency between controlled attenuation parameter and MRI-PDFF in monitoring metabolic associated fatty liver disease

Cong Xiang Shao et al. Ther Adv Chronic Dis. .

Abstract

Background: The consistency in steatosis grading between magnetic resonance imaging-based proton density fat fraction (MRI-PDFF) and controlled attenuation parameter (CAP) before and after treatment remains unclear. This study aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of steatosis grading between MRI-PDFF and CAP using liver biopsy as standard and to evaluate the value of monitoring changes in steatosis grading with CAP during follow-up utilizing MRI-PDFF as a reference.

Methods: Consecutive patients from a biopsy cohort and a randomized controlled trial were included in this study and classified into 3 groups (the biopsy, orlistat treatment, and routine treatment subgroups). Hepatic steatosis was measured via MRI-PDFF and CAP at baseline and at the 6th month; the accuracy and cutoffs were assessed in the liver biopsy cohort at baseline.

Results: A total of 209 consecutive patients were enrolled. MRI-PDFF and CAP showed comparable diagnostic accuracy for detecting pathological steatosis [⩾S1, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) = 0.984 and 0.972, respectively]; in contrast, CAP presented significantly lower AUCs in grades S2-3 and S3 (0.820 and 0.815, respectively). The CAP values correlated well with the MRI-PDFF values at baseline and at the 6th month (r = 0.809 and 0.762, respectively, both p < 0.001), whereas a moderate correlation in their changes (r = 0.612 and 0.524 for moderate-severe and mild steatosis, respectively; both p < 0.001) was observed. The AUC of CAP change was obtained to predict MRI-PDFF changes of ⩾5% and ⩾10% (0.685 and 0.704, p < 0.001 and p = 0.001, respectively). The diagnostic agreement of steatosis grade changes between MRI-PDFF and CAP was weak (κ = 0.181, p = 0.001).

Conclusions: CAP has decreased value for the initial screening of moderate-severe steatosis and is limited in monitoring changes in steatosis during treatment. The confirmation of steatosis grading with MRI-PDFF remains necessary.

Keywords: controlled attenuation parameter; hepatic steatosis; liver biopsy; magnetic resonance imaging-based proton density fat fraction; metabolic associated fatty liver disease.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of interest statement: The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
STARD diagrams to show the flow of patients in the present study. The cutoff values we used here was derived from the first part of the present study “Diagnostic accuracy in steatosis grade using histology as a standard” and presented as 244 dB/m, 265 dB/m, and 292 dB/m for S0/1, S1/2, and S2/3 of CAP, and 5%, 14.6%, and 24.3% for S0/1, S1/2, and S2/3 of MRI-PDFF. CAP, controlled attenuation parameter; MRI-PDFF, magnetic resonance imaging-based proton density fat fraction.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Diagnostic accuracy comparison between MRI-PDFF and CAP using histology as standard in detecting and grading hepatic steatosis: (a) S0 versus S1–3. (b) S0–1 versus S2–3. (c) S0–2 versus S3. ROC of CAP change in predicting MRI-PDFF change ⩾5% and ⩾10% (d) and MRI-PDFF steatosis grade worsening (e) and improvement (f). CAP, controlled attenuation parameter; MRI-PDFF, magnetic resonance imaging-estimated proton density fat fraction; ROC, receiver operator characteristic.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
Correlation between MRI-PDFF and CAP. (a) All patients at baseline. (b) All patients at the 6th month. (c) Steatosis changes measured by MRI-PDFF and CAP in all patients. (d) Patients with biopsy at baseline. (e) Patients with biopsy at the 6th month. (f) Steatosis changes measured by MRI-PDFF and CAP in patients with biopsy. (g) Patients without biopsy at baseline. (h) Patients without biopsy at the 6th month. (i) Steatosis changes measured by MRI-PDFF and CAP in patients without biopsy. CAP, controlled attenuation parameter; MRI-PDFF, magnetic resonance imaging-estimated proton density fat fraction.
Figure 4.
Figure 4.
Steatosis grade changes agreement between MRI-PDFF and CAP among all NAFLD patients (a), mild NAFLD patients (b), and moderate-severe NAFLD patients (c), respectively. CAP, controlled attenuation parameter; MRI-PDFF, magnetic resonance imaging-estimated proton density fat fraction; NAFLD, non-alcoholic fatty liver disease.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Younossi ZM, Koenig AB, Abdelatif D, et al.. Global epidemiology of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease-meta-analytic assessment of prevalence, incidence, and outcomes. Hepatology 2016; 64: 73–84. - PubMed
    1. Bedossa P, Carrat F.Liver biopsy: the best, not the gold standard. J Hepatol 2009; 50: 1–3. - PubMed
    1. Raptis DA, Fischer MA, Graf R, et al.. MRI: the new reference standard in quantifying hepatic steatosis? Gut 2012; 61: 117–127. - PubMed
    1. Meisamy S, Hines CD, Hamilton G, et al.. Quantification of hepatic steatosis with T1-independent, T2-corrected MR imaging with spectral modeling of fat: blinded comparison with MR spectroscopy. Radiology 2011; 258: 767–775. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Grąt K, Grąt M, Rowiński O.Usefulness of different imaging modalities in evaluation of patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. Biomedicines 2020; 8: 298. - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources

  NODES
twitter 2