Objective: Diagnosing liver fibrosis without resorting to invasive surgery is in high demand but underserved. The focus of this study is on the diagnostic accuracy of MRI and the transient elastography fibro scan for liver fibrosis. Methodology: After the ethical approval from institute review board, sixty patients with liver fibrosis were selected by random sampling technique underwent multiparametric MR, transesophageal echocardiography (TE), and blood testing in this single-center cross-sectional study. Noninvasive treatment alternatives were weighed against histological information including stage and grade (such as MR fat and iron content). The diagnostic accuracy of each method for F3 and F4 hepatic fibrosis, as well as for advanced fibrosis, was evaluated using ROC curve analysis. Each technique was evaluated based on its accuracy (F3–F4). Results: Magnetic resonance elastography was used to find significant correlations between fibrosis stage and collagen content (r = 0.66; P = 0.001), as well as between inflammatory grade and collagen content (r = 0.53; P = 0.036). The MRE, TE, DCE-MRI, DWI, and APRI all had AUCs of 0.78 or above, while the AUC for identifying advanced fibrosis was 0.71. Advanced fibrosis AUC values were between 0.94 and 0.77, 0.79 and 0.79, and 0.70 and 0.70. (F3–F4). Practical implication: This study will to determine which diagnostic technique is better suited to accurately diagnose the liver fibrosis patients. Conclusion: The strongest correlation was seen between histological markers and MRI. The ability of magnetic resonance imaging to detect advanced liver fibrosis and cirrhosis was also superior to that of transient elastography fibro scans. Keywords: MRI, Liver fibrosis, diagnostic accuracy, transient elastography fibro scan

Aim: A comparison between chromocolonoscopy versus white light colonoscopy in screening colorectal cancer Methods: Patients were randomly assigned to high-definition white light colonoscopy (HDWLC) and high-definition chromocolonoscopy (HDCH). The patients were divided into two groups, each had 110 individuals Results: An adenoma affected 1.2 to 2.1 patients on average, while polyps affected 1.4 to 1.9 patients on average, with an adenoma affecting 0.5 to 1.0 patient on average. Both the number of patients with at least one adenoma (54.5% vs. 47.2%, absolute difference 7.3%, 95% confidence interval (p value <0.01) and the number of adenomas per patient (1.2 versus 1.0, P <0.01) were slightly higher in the chromocolonoscopy group. Adenomas that had progressed by 10 mm or more differed from those that had progressed by <10 mm (0.16 versus 0.14, P = 0.4), although the differences were not statistically significant. In each group, one invasive malignancy was discovered, and it wasn't a benign tumor or neoplasm. By chromocolonoscopy, non-neoplastic lesions (1.9 per patient versus 1.1 per patient, P = 0.01) were detected significantly more frequently than adenomas larger than 5 mm in diameter (0.9 per patient versus 0.8 per patient, P < 0.01) Conclusion: When compared to high-definition white light colonoscopy, high-definition chromocolonoscopy had a marginally greater rate of adenoma diagnosis and a moderate increase in flat adenomas and small lesions but not in large lesions. When it came to more advanced malignancies, both techniques produced the same results. Keywords: Colorectal cancer, chromocolonoscopy