4.5 Article

Controlled attenuation parameter using the FibroScan® XL probe for quantification of hepatic steatosis for non-alcoholic fatty liver disease in an Asian population

Journal

UNITED EUROPEAN GASTROENTEROLOGY JOURNAL
Volume 5, Issue 1, Pages 76-85

Publisher

JOHN WILEY & SONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/2050640616646528

Keywords

Non‐ alcoholic fatty liver disease; NAFLD; controlled attenuation parameter; CAP; liver stiffness measurement; LSM; FibroScan; XL probe; steatosis; fibrosis

Funding

  1. University of Malaya Research Grant [RG536-13HTM]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background The FibroScan (R) XL probe reduces failure of liver stiffness measurement (LSM) and unreliable results in obese patients. Objective The objective of this article is to evaluate the accuracy of controlled attenuation parameter (CAP) obtained using the XL probe for the estimation of hepatic steatosis in patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). Methods Adult NAFLD patients with a liver biopsy within six months were included and were examined with the FibroScan (R) M and XL probes. Histopathological findings were reported according to the Non-Alcoholic Steatohepatitis Clinical Research Network Scoring System. Participants who did not have fatty liver on ultrasonography were recruited as controls. Results A total of 57 NAFLD patients and 22 controls were included. The mean age of the NAFLD patients and controls was 50.1 +/- 10.4 years and 20.2 +/- 1.3 years, respectively (p = 0.000). The mean body mass index was 30.2 +/- 5.0 kg per m(2) and 20.5 +/- 2.4 kg per m(2), respectively (p = 0.000). The distribution of steatosis grades were: S0, 29%; S1, 17%; S2, 35%; S3, 19%. The AUROC for estimation of steatosis grade >= S1, S2 and S3 was 0.94, 0.80 and 0.69, respectively, using the M probe, and 0.97, 0.81 and 0.67, respectively, using the XL probe. Conclusion CAP obtained using the XL probe had similar accuracy as the M probe for the estimation of hepatic steatosis in NAFLD patients.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available