Noninvasive measurement of liver stiffness with transient elastography has been recently validated for the evaluation of hepatic fibrosis in chronic hepatitis C. The current study assessed the diagnostic performance of liver stiffness measurement (LSM) for the determination of fibrosis stage in chronic cholestatic diseases. One hundred one patients with primary biliary cirrhosis (PBC, n ‫؍‬ 73) or primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC, n ‫؍‬ 28) were prospectively enrolled in a multicenter study. All patients underwent liver biopsy (LB) and LSM. Histological and fibrosis stages were assessed on LB by two pathologists. LSM was performed by transient elastography. Efficiency of LSM for the determination of histological and fibrosis stages were determined by a receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve analysis. Analysis failed in six patients (5.9%) because of unsuitable LB (n ‫؍‬ 4) or LSM (n ‫؍‬ 2). Stiffness values ranged from 2.8 to 69.1 kPa (median, 7.8 kPa). LSM was correlated to both fibrosis (Spearman's ‫؍‬ 0.84, P < .0001) and histological (0.79, P < .0001) stages. These correlations were still found when PBC and PSC patients were analyzed separately. Areas under ROC curves were 0.92 for fibrosis stage (F) >2, 0.95 for F > 3 and 0.96 for F ‫؍‬ 4. Optimal stiffness cutoff values of 7.3, 9.8, and 17.3 kPa showed F > 2, F > 3 and F ‫؍‬ 4, respectively. LSM and serum hyaluronic acid level were independent parameters associated with extensive fibrosis on LB. In conclusion, transient elastography is a simple and reliable noninvasive means for assessing biliary fibrosis. It should be a promising tool to assess antifibrotic therapies in PBC or PSC. (HEPATOLOGY 2006;43:1118-1124

No abstract

The development of liver fibrosis markers in primary biliary cirrhosis (PBC) is needed to facilitate the assessment of its progression and the effectiveness of new therapies. Here, we investigated the potential usefulness of transient elastography (TE) in the noninvasive evaluation of liver fibrosis stage and disease progression in PBC. We performed, first, a prospective performance analysis of TE for the diagnosis of METAVIR fibrosis stages in a diagnostic cohort of 103 patients and, second, a retrospective longitudinal analysis of repeated examinations in a monitoring cohort of 150 patients followed-up for up to 5 years. All patients were treated with ursodeoxycholic acid. Diagnostic thresholds of liver stiffness in discriminating fibrosis stages ≥F1, ≥F2, ≥F3, and =F4 were 7.1, 8.8, 10.7, and 16.9 kPa, respectively. TE showed high performance and was significantly superior to biochemical markers (e.g., aspartate aminotransferase [AST]/platelet ratio, FIB-4, hyaluronic acid, AST/alanine aminotransferase ratio, and Mayo score) in diagnosing significant fibrosis, severe fibrosis, or cirrhosis. Analysis of the monitoring cohort data set using generalized linear models showed the following: (1) an overall progression rate of 0.48 ± 0.21 kPa/year (P = 0.02) and (2) no significant progression in patients with F0-F1, F2, or F3 stages, but a significant increase (4.06 ± 0.72 kPa/year; P < 0.0001) in cirrhotic patients. A cut-off value of 2.1 kPa/year was associated with an 8.4-fold increased risk of liver decompensations, liver transplantations, or deaths (P < 0.0001, Cox regression analysis). Conclusion: TE is one of the best current surrogate markers of liver fibrosis in PBC. Over a 5-year period, on-treatment liver stiffness appears stable in most noncirrhotic PBC patients, whereas it significantly increases in patients with cirrhosis. Progression of liver stiffness in PBC is predictive of poor outcome. (HEPATOLOGY 2012;56:198–208)

Liver biopsy is the gold standard for assessing fibrosis but has several limitations. We evaluated a noninvasive method, so-called diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DWMRI), which measures the apparent diffusion coefficient (