Intra-individual Comparisons of the Ultrasound-Guided Attenuation Parameter and the Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Based Proton Density Fat Fraction Using Bias and Precision Statistics
- PMID: 35613974
- DOI: 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2022.03.019
Intra-individual Comparisons of the Ultrasound-Guided Attenuation Parameter and the Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Based Proton Density Fat Fraction Using Bias and Precision Statistics
Abstract
Ultrasound-based techniques using the attenuation coefficient, including the ultrasound-guided attenuation parameter (UGAP), have been developed for the quantification of hepatic steatosis. The magnetic resonance imaging-based proton density fat fraction (MRI-PDFF) is considered to be more accurate than liver biopsy for liver fat quantification. The aim of this study was to perform intra-individual comparisons of UGAP and MRI-PDFF for determining hepatic steatosis grade. The study enrolled 309 patients who underwent UGAP and MRI-PDFF measurements. Bland-Altman analysis was conducted after transforming MRI-PDFF values to a normal distribution and converted to a common set of units using linear regression analysis for differing scales. The expected limits of agreement (LOA) was defined as the square root of the sum of the squares of UGAP and MRI-PDFF precision. A Bland-Altman plot revealed that the bias and upper and lower LOAs (ULOA and LLOA) were -0.0047, 0.1160 and -0.1255, respectively. The percentage difference indicated that the mean, ULOA and LLOA were -1.1434%, 18.1723% and -20.4590%, respectively. The calculated expected LOA was 18.5449%, and 283 of 309 patients (91.6%) had a percentage difference within 18.5449%. Bland-Altman analysis revealed that UGAP and MRI-PDFF were interchangeable within a clinically acceptable range.
Keywords: Attenuation coefficient; Bland–Altman analysis; Hepatic steatosis; Intra-class correlation coefficient; Magnetic resonance imaging–based proton density fat fraction; Ultrasound-guided attenuation parameter.
Copyright © 2022 World Federation for Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Conflict of interest statement
Conflict of interest disclosure T.K. has received research grants from GE Healthcare. All other authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
Similar articles
-
Utility of Ultrasound-Guided Attenuation Parameter for Grading Steatosis With Reference to MRI-PDFF in a Large Cohort.Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2022 Nov;20(11):2533-2541.e7. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2021.11.003. Epub 2021 Nov 10. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2022. PMID: 34768008
-
Utility of Attenuation Coefficient Measurement Using an Ultrasound-Guided Attenuation Parameter for Evaluation of Hepatic Steatosis: Comparison With MRI-Determined Proton Density Fat Fraction.AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2019 Feb;212(2):332-341. doi: 10.2214/AJR.18.20123. Epub 2018 Nov 26. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2019. PMID: 30476453
-
iATT liver fat quantification for steatosis grading by referring to MRI proton density fat fraction: a multicenter study.J Gastroenterol. 2024 Jun;59(6):504-514. doi: 10.1007/s00535-024-02096-w. Epub 2024 Mar 30. J Gastroenterol. 2024. PMID: 38553657 Free PMC article.
-
Linearity, Bias, and Precision of Hepatic Proton Density Fat Fraction Measurements by Using MR Imaging: A Meta-Analysis.Radiology. 2018 Feb;286(2):486-498. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2017170550. Epub 2017 Sep 11. Radiology. 2018. PMID: 28892458 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound-guided attenuation parameter as a noninvasive test for steatosis in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease.J Med Ultrason (2001). 2021 Oct;48(4):471-480. doi: 10.1007/s10396-021-01123-0. Epub 2021 Aug 20. J Med Ultrason (2001). 2021. PMID: 34415481 Review.
Cited by
-
Reliability and stability of ultrasound-guided attenuation parameter in evaluating hepatic steatosis.J Ultrasound. 2024 Mar;27(1):145-152. doi: 10.1007/s40477-023-00856-7. Epub 2024 Jan 28. J Ultrasound. 2024. PMID: 38281291
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical