Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Two-dimensional shear wave elastography of the pancreas: measurement success rate, repeatability, and factors affecting measurement values

  • Original Article–Gastroenterology
  • Published:
Journal of Medical Ultrasonics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

We aimed to evaluate the success rate, repeatability, and factors affecting the measurement values of two-dimensional ultrasonic shear wave elastography (2D-SWE) for measuring pancreatic stiffness.

Methods

This prospective study recruited 100 healthy participants. 2D-SWE was performed on the pancreatic head, body, and tail. We compared the success rates of pancreatic stiffness measurements of different body positions and ultrasonic scans, with and without probe pressurization, as well as the effects of sex, age, body mass index (BMI), and region of interest (ROI) depth on measurement values. Intra- and inter-operator repeatabilities were assessed in 20 participants. The influence of ROI depth was verified using a tissue-like phantom.

Results

The median 2D-SWE measurements of the pancreatic head, body, and tail were 1.44, 1.45, and 1.56 m/s, respectively. The success rates for the pancreatic head and body were significantly higher than that of the tail. The success rate for the semi-recumbent position was higher than that of the supine position (P < 0.001). The intra-operator values for same-day and inter-operator reliability were excellent. Univariate analyses showed that probe pressurization, age, BMI, and ROI depth were correlated with pancreatic shear wave velocity (SWV) (P < 0.05); only ROI depth had a significant effect on SWV values. The inclusion phantom showed that the SWV value increased as the ROI depth increased.

Conclusions

2D-SWE had a high success rate and good repeatability for measuring pancreatic head and body stiffness. The ROI depth was the main factor affecting pancreatic SWV, which increased with ROI depth.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bamber J, Cosgrove D, Dietrich CF, et al. EFSUMB guidelines and recommendations on the clinical use of ultrasound elastography. Part 1: basic principles and technology. Ultraschall Med. 2013;34:169–84.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Hirooka Y, Kuwahara T, Irisawa A, et al. JSUM ultrasound elastography practice guidelines: pancreas. J Med Ultrason. 2015;42:151–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bercoff J, Tanter M, Fink M. Supersonic shear imaging: a new technique for soft tissue elasticity mapping. IEEE Trans Ultrason Ferroelectr Freq Control. 2004;51:396–409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bavu E, Gennisson JL, Couade M, et al. Noninvasive in vivo liver fibrosis evaluation using supersonic shear imaging: a clinical study on 113 hepatitis C virus patients. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2011;37:1361–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Arda K, Ciledag N, Aktas E, Aribas BK, Köse K. Quantitative assessment of normal soft-tissue elasticity using shear-wave ultrasound elastography. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011;197:532–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Zaro R, Dina L, Pojoga C, Vesa S, Badea R. Evaluation of the pancreatic tumors by transabdominal shear wave elastography: preliminary results of a pilot study. Med Ultrason. 2018;20:285–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Dietrich CF, Hocke M. Elastography of the pancreas, current view. Clin Endosc. 2019;52:533–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Nguyen MM, Zhou S, Robert JL, Shamdasani V, Xie H. Development of oil-in-gelatin phantoms for viscoelasticity measurement in ultrasound shear wave elastography. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2014;40:168–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Hazra A, Gogtay N. Biostatistics series module 6: correlation and linear regression. Indian J Dermatol. 2016;61:593–601.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Boursier J, Konaté A, Gorea G, et al. Reproducibility of liver stiffness measurement by ultrasonographic elastometry. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2008;6:1263–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Hudson JM, Milot L, Parry C, Williams R, Burns PN. Inter- and intra-operator reliability and repeatability of shear wave elastography in the liver: a study in healthy volunteers. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2013;39:950–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Ohno E, Hirooka Y, Kawashima H, et al. Feasibility and usefulness of endoscopic ultrasonography-guided shear-wave measurement for assessment of autoimmune pancreatitis activity: a prospective exploratory study. J Med Ultrason. 2019;46:425–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Wang CZ, Zheng J, Huang ZP, et al. Influence of measurement depth on the stiffness assessment of healthy liver with real-time shear wave elastography. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2014;40:461–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Ferraioli G, Filice C, Castera L, et al. WFUMB guidelines and recommendations for clinical use of ultrasound elastography: part 3: liver. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2015;41:1161–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Sporea I, Bota S, Peck-Radosavljevic M, et al. Acoustic radiation force impulse elastography for fibrosis evaluation in patients with chronic hepatitis C:an international multicenter study. Eur J Radiol. 2012;81:4112–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Cassinotto C, Lapuyade B, Aït-Ali A, et al. Liver fibrosis: noninvasive assessment with acoustic radiation force impulse elastography–comparison with FibroScan M and XL probes and FibroTest in patients with chronic liver disease. Radiology. 2013;269:283–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Yashima Y, Sasahira N, Isayama H, et al. Acoustic radiation force impulse elastography for noninvasive assessment of chronic pancreatitis. J Gastroenterol. 2012;47:427–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Kuwahara T, Hirooka Y, Kawashima H, et al. Quantitative evaluation of pancreatic tumor fibrosis using shear wave elastography. Pancreatology. 2016;16:1063–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Kawada N, Tanaka S, Uehara H, et al. Potential use of point shear wave elastography for the pancreas: a single center prospective study. Eur J Radiol. 2014;83:620–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Zaro R, Lupsor-Platon M, Cheviet A, Badea R. The pursuit of normal reference values of pancreas stiffness by using acoustic radiation force impulse (ARFI) elastography. Med Ultrason. 2016;18:425–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Lam AC, Pang SW, Ahuja AT, Bhatia KS. The influence of precompression on elasticity of thyroid nodules estimated by ultrasound shear wave elastography. Eur Radiol. 2016;26:2845–52.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Stumpf S, Jaeger H, Graeter T, et al. Elasto-study group ulm. Influence of age, sex, body mass index, alcohol, and smoking on shear wave velocity (p-SWE) of the pancreas. Abdom Radiol (NY). 2016;41:1310–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Goertz RS, Schuderer J, Strobel D, Pfeifer L, Neurath MF, Wildner D. Acoustic radiation force impulse shear wave elastography (ARFI) of acute and chronic pancreatitis and pancreatic tumor. Eur J Radiol. 2016;85:2211–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Püttmann S, Koch J, Steinacker JP, et al. Ultrasound point shear wave elastography of the pancreas: comparison of patients with type 1 diabetes and healthy volunteers—results from a pilot study. BMC Med Imaging. 2018;18:52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. He Y, Jin Y, Li X, Wu L, Jin C. Quantification of pancreatic elasticity in type 2 diabetes: a new potential imaging marker for evaluation of microangiopathy. Eur J Radiol. 2020;124:108827.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Ozturk M, Çalışkan E, Bayramoglu Z, Adaletli I. Normative values of pancreas stiffness by shear wave elastography in healthy children and adolescents. J Med Ultrason. 2020;47:583–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Potthoff A, Attia D, Pischke S, et al. Influence of different frequencies and insertion depths on the diagnostic accuracy of liver elastography by acoustic radiation force impulse imaging (ARFI). Eur J Radiol. 2013;82:1207–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Zhao H, Song P, Urban MW, et al. Bias observed in time-of-flight shear wave speed measurements using radiation force of a focused ultrasound beam. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2011;37:1884–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the Joint Funds for the Innovation of Science and Technology of Fujian Province (2019Y9066).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Ultrasound, Fujian Medical University Affiliated Union Hospital, No.29 Xinquan Road, Fuzhou, 350001, Fujian, China

    Minling Zhuo, Xiujuan Zhang, Yi Tang, Yan Yan & Zhikui Chen

Authors
  1. Minling Zhuo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Xiujuan Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yi Tang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Yan Yan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Zhikui Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Zhikui Chen.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

None.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 24 KB)

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zhuo, M., Zhang, X., Tang, Y. et al. Two-dimensional shear wave elastography of the pancreas: measurement success rate, repeatability, and factors affecting measurement values. J Med Ultrasonics 49, 261–268 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10396-022-01198-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10396-022-01198-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation