Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is the most common chronic liver disease worldwide. This study aimed to evaluate the performance of four ultrasound-based techniques for the non-invasive multiparametric (MPUS) assessment of liver fibrosis (LF), steatosis (HS), and inflammation in patients with NAFLD. We included 215 consecutive adult patients with NAFLD (mean age: 54.9 ± 11.7; 54.5% were male), in whom LF, HS, and viscosity were evaluated in the same session using four new ultrasound-based techniques embedded on the Aixplorer MACH 30 system: ShearWave Elastography (2D-SWE.PLUS), Sound Speed Plane-wave UltraSound (SSp.PLUS), Attenuation Plane-wave UltraSound (Att.PLUS), and Viscosity Plane-wave UltraSound (Vi.PLUS). Transient Elastography (TE) with Controlled Attenuation Parameter (CAP) (FibroScan) were considered as control. All elastographic measurements were performed according to guidelines. Valid liver stiffness measurements (LSM) were obtained in 98.6% of patients by TE, in 95.8% of patients by 2D-SWE.PLUS/Vi.PLUS, and in 98.1% of patients by Att.PLUS/SSp.PLUS, respectively. Therefore, 204 subjects were included in the final analysis. A strong correlation between LSMs by 2D-SWE.PLUS and TE (r = 0.89) was found. The best 2D-SWE.PLUS cut-off value for the presence of significant fibrosis (F ≥ 2) was 7 kPa. Regarding steatosis, SSp.PLUS correlated better than Att.PLUS with CAP values: (r = −0.74) vs. (r = 0.45). The best SSp.PLUS cut-off value for predicting the presence of significant steatosis was 1524 m/s. The multivariate regression analysis showed that Vi.PLUS values were associated with BMI and LSM by 2D-SWE.PLUS. In conclusion, MPUS was useful for assessing fibrosis, steatosis, and inflammation in a single examination in patients with NAFLD.

Aim: To evaluate the feasibility of two elastographic methods, point Shear Wave Elastography (pSWE) and two dimensional Shear Wave Elastography (2D-SWE), integrated in the same ultrasound machine, for liver fibrosis (LF) assessment, using Transient Elastography (TE) as the reference method.Material and methods: We included in the study 115 subjects in which LF was evaluated in the same session by TE (FibroScan, EchoSens), pSWE and 2D-SWE (Samsung-Medison RS85). Reliable liver stiffness (LS) measurements were defined: for TE the median value of 10 measurements with interquartile range (IQR/M)≤30%,while for pSWE and 2D-SWE the median value of 10 measurements, with a reliability measurement index (RMI)≥0.5 and IQR/M≤30%. For classification of LF severity we used TE as the reference method with the following cut-offs: F2≥7kPa, F3≥9.5kPa and F4≥12kPa.Results: Reliable measurements by TE were obtained in 98.2% of cases (113/115), by pSWE in 93.9% of cases (108/115) and by 2D-SWE in 92.1% of cases (106/115), so the final analysis included 101 patients. We divided the cohort into 3 groups: fibrosis 5.9 kPa [AUROC=0.95, 95%CI(0.89;0.98), p<0.0001, Se=94.1%, Sp=89.5%, PPV=82.1%, NPV=96.8%]; F4 LS >8 kPa [AUROC=0.98, 95%CI(0.94;0.99), p<0.0001, Se=94.4%, Sp=95.1%, PPV=81%, NPV=98.7%], while for 2D-SWE they were: F≥2 LS >6.1 kPa [AUROC=0.93, 95%CI(0.86;0.97), p<0.0001, Se=91.1%, Sp=80.6%, PPV=70.5%, NPV=94.7%]; F4 LS >7.6 kPa [AUROC=0.98, 95%CI(0.93;0.99), p<0.0001, Se=100%, Sp=91.5%, PPV=72%, NPV=100%]. We observed strong correlations between LS values obtained by TE and 2D-SWE (r=0.85), between TE and pSWE (r=0.88) and between pSWE and 2D-SWE (r=0.90) (p=0.37), respectively. There were no significant differences between the mean values obtained by pSWE and 2D-SWE (p=0.96).Conclusion: The pSWE and 2D-SWE are feasible methods for assessing liver fibrosis, both techniques strongly correlating with TE results.

Lille score at Day 7 (LM7) helps to predict the outcome of patients with severe alcoholic hepatitis (sAH) undergoing corticotherapy. Several scores such as Maddrey’s discriminant function (MDF), MELD, ABIC, and GAHS are used for a 28-day mortality prognosis. Our study aimed to evaluate if the assessment of the Lille score at 4 days (LM4) is as useful as the Lille score at Day 7 (LM7) to predict response to corticosteroids and 28-day mortality and evaluate the utility of severity scores at admission for predicting the prognosis of patients with liver cirrhosis (LC) and severe alcoholic hepatitis (sAH). A retrospective study was performed, and all consecutive patients with AH and MDF > 32 without contraindications to corticosteroids were included. Prognostic scores were evaluated at admission, and 28-day mortality was assessed. Response to corticotherapy was assessed by LM4 and LM7. Results: A total of 55/103 patients with sAH (51.5%) had MDF > 32 and received corticosteroids. There was no difference between the proportion of patients with a responder LM4 versus LM7 (27% vs. 36%, p = 0.31). The mean value for LM4 was 0.64 ± 0.3 versus 0.60 ± 0.3 for LM7 (p = 0.48). Precisely 90.3% of patients were correctly identified as responders or not by LM4 compared with LM7. The best model for predicting 28-day mortality was composed of MELD and LM4/LM7, with an accuracy of 0.90 for both combinations. Conclusion: LM4 could be used instead of LM7 for predicting response to corticosteroid therapy in patients with sAH and LC, as well as 28-day mortality. Using LM4, we could avoid prolonged use of this therapy and its complications.

No abstract

Liver fibrosis is the most significant prognostic factor in chronic liver disease (CLD). Clinical practice guidelines recommend the use of non-invasive techniques, such as two-dimensional shear-wave elastography (2D-SWE), to assess liver stiffness as a marker of fibrosis. Several other factors influence liver stiffness in addition to liver fibrosis. It is presumed that changes due to necro-inflammation modify the propagation of shear waves (dispersion). Therefore, new imaging techniques that investigate the dispersion properties of shear waves have been developed, which can serve as an indirect method of measuring liver viscosity (Vi PLUS). Defining the reference values in healthy subjects among different age groups and genders and analyzing the factors that influence these values is essential. However, published data on liver viscosity are still limited. This is the first study that aimed to assess the normal range of liver viscosity values in subjects with healthy livers and analyze the factors that influence them. One hundred and thirty-one consecutive subjects with healthy livers were enrolled in this prospective study. The results showed that Vi PLUS is a highly feasible method. Liver stiffness, age and BMI influenced the liver viscosity values. The mean liver viscosity by Vi PLUS in subjects with healthy livers was 1.59 Pa·s.