Advertisement

European Radiology

, Volume 27, Issue 7, pp 3060–3068 | Cite as

Hepatosplenic volumetric assessment at MDCT for staging liver fibrosis

  • Perry J. Pickhardt
  • Kyle Malecki
  • Oliver F. Hunt
  • Claire Beaumont
  • John Kloke
  • Timothy J. Ziemlewicz
  • Meghan G. Lubner
Hepatobiliary-Pancreas

Abstract

Purpose

To investigate hepatosplenic volumetry at MDCT for non-invasive prediction of hepatic fibrosis.

Methods

Hepatosplenic volume analysis in 624 patients (mean age, 48.8 years; 311 M/313 F) at MDCT was performed using dedicated software and compared against pathological fibrosis stage (F0 = 374; F1 = 48; F2 = 40; F3 = 65; F4 = 97). The liver segmental volume ratio (LSVR) was defined by Couinaud segments I–III over segments IV–VIII. All pre-cirrhotic fibrosis stages (METAVIR F1-F3) were based on liver biopsy within 1 year of MDCT.

Results

LSVR and total splenic volumes increased with stage of fibrosis, with mean(±SD) values of: F0: 0.26 ± 0.06 and 215.1 ± 88.5 mm3; F1: 0.25 ± 0.08 and 294.8 ± 153.4 mm3; F2: 0.331 ± 0.12 and 291.6 ± 197.1 mm3; F3: 0.39 ± 0.15 and 509.6 ± 402.6 mm3; F4: 0.56 ± 0.30 and 790.7 ± 450.3 mm3, respectively. Total hepatic volumes showed poor discrimination (F0: 1674 ± 320 mm3; F4: 1631 ± 691 mm3). For discriminating advanced fibrosis (≥F3), the ROC AUC values for LSVR, total liver volume, splenic volume and LSVR/spleen combined were 0.863, 0.506, 0.890 and 0.947, respectively.

Conclusion

Relative changes in segmental liver volumes and total splenic volume allow for non-invasive staging of hepatic fibrosis, whereas total liver volume is a poor predictor. Unlike liver biopsy or elastography, these CT volumetric biomarkers can be obtained retrospectively on routine scans obtained for other indications.

Key Points

Regional changes in hepatic volume (LSVR) correlate well with degree of fibrosis.

Total liver volume is a very poor predictor of underlying fibrosis.

Total splenic volume is associated with the degree of hepatic fibrosis.

Hepatosplenic volume assessment is comparable to elastography for staging fibrosis.

Unlike elastography, volumetric analysis can be performed retrospectively.

Keywords

MDCT Cirrhosis Liver fibrosis Volume Volumetric analysis 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The scientific guarantor of this publication is PJ Pickhardt. The authors of this manuscript declare relationships with the following companies: Dr. Pickhardt is co-founder of VirtuoCTC and shareholder in Cellectar Biosciences, Elucent and SHINE. This study has received funding support from Philips and the Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) program, through the NIH National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS), grant UL1TR000427. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the NIH. One of the authors has significant statistical expertise. Institutional Review Board approval was obtained. Written informed consent was waived by the Institutional Review Board for this retrospective study. A sub-cohort has been previously reported in the initial validation trial [16]. Methodology: retrospective, cross-sectional, performed at one institution.

References

  1. 1.
    Afdhal NH, Nunes D (2004) Evaluation of liver fibrosis: a concise review. Am J Gastroenterol 99:1160–74CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Martinez SM, Crespo G, Navasa M, Forns X (2011) Noninvasive assessment of liver fibrosis. Hepatology 53:325–35CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Friedrich-Rust M, Nierhoff J, Lupsor M et al (2012) Performance of acoustic radiation force impulse imaging for the staging of liver fibrosis: a pooled meta-analysis. J Viral Hepat 19:E212–9CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Friedrich-Rust M, Ong M-F, Martens S et al (2008) Performance of transient elastography for the staging of liver fibrosis: a meta-analysis. Gastroenterology 134:960–74CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Singh S, Venkatesh SK, Wang Z et al (2015) Diagnostic performance of magnetic resonance elastography in staging liver fibrosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 13:440–51CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Talwalkar JA, Kurtz DM, Schoenleber SJ, West CP, Montori VM (2007) Utrasound-based transient elastography for the detection of hepatic fibrosis: systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 5:1214–20CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wang Q-B, Zhu H, Liu H-L, Zhang B (2012) Performance of magnetic resonance elastography and diffusion-weighted imaging for the staging of hepatic fibrosis: a meta-analysis. Hepatology 56:239–47CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Castera L, Vergniol J, Foucher J et al (2005) Prospective comparison of transient elastography, fibrotest, APRI, and liver biopsy for the assessment of fibrosis in chronic hepatitis C. Gastroenterology 128:343–50CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Foucher J, Chanteloup E, Vergniol J et al (2006) Diagnosis of cirrhosis by transient elastography (FibroScan): a prospective study. Gut 55:403–8CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Yin M, Talwalkar JA, Glaser KJ et al (2007) Assessment of hepatic fibrosis with magnetic resonance elastography. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 5:1207–13CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Yin M, Glaser KJ, Talwalkar JA, Chen J, Manduca A, Ehman RL (2016) Hepatic MR Elastography: Clinical Performance in a Series of 1377 Consecutive Examinations. Radiology 278:114–24CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Yoshimitsu K, Mitsufuji T, Shinagawa Y et al (2016) MR elastography of the liver at 3.0 T in diagnosing liver fibrosis grades; preliminary clinical experience. Eur Radiol 26:656–63CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Tang A, Cloutier G, Szeverenyi NM, Sirlin CB (2015) Ultrasound elastography and mr elastography for assessing liver fibrosis: Part 2, diagnostic performance, confounders, and future directions. Am J Roentgenol 205:33–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sagir A, Erhardt A, Schmitt M, Haussinger D (2008) Transient elastography is unreliable for detection of cirrhosis in patients with acute liver damage. Hepatology 47:592–5CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Chen J, Talwalkar JA, Yin M, Glaser KJ, Sanderson SO, Ehman RL (2011) Early detection of nonalcoholic steatohepatitis in patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease by using MR elastography. Radiology 259:749–56CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Furusato Hunt OM, Lubner MG, Ziemlewicz TJ, Munoz Del Rio A, Pickhardt PJ (2016) The liver segmental volume ratio for noninvasive detection of cirrhosis: comparison with established linear and volumetric measures. J Comput Assist Tomogr 40:478–84CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lubner MG, Pooler BD, del Rio AM, Durkee B, Pickhardt PJ (2014) Volumetric evaluation of hepatic tumors: multi-vendor, multi-reader liver phantom study. Abdom Imaging 39:488–96PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bandula S, Punwani S, Rosenberg WM et al (2015) Equilibrium contrast-enhanced ct imaging to evaluate hepatic fibrosis: initial validation by comparison with histopathologic analysis. Radiology 275:136–43CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Romero-Gomez M, Gomez-Gonzalez E, Madrazo A et al (2008) Optical analysis of computed tomography images of the liver predicts fibrosis stage and distribution in chronic hepatitis C. Hepatology 47:810–6CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sandrasegaran K, Akisik FM, Lin C et al (2009) Value of diffusion-weighted MRI for assessing liver fibrosis and cirrhosis. Am J Roentgenol 193:1556–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Taouli B, Chouli M, Martin AJ, Qayyum A, Coakley FV, Vilgrain V (2008) Chronic hepatitis: role of diffusion-weighted imaging and diffusion-tensor Imaging for the diagnosis of liver fibrosis and inflammation. J Magn Reson Imaging 28:89–95CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Wu CH, Ho MC, Jeng YM et al (2015) Assessing hepatic fibrosis: comparing the intravoxel incoherent motion in MRI with acoustic radiation force impulse imaging in US. Eur Radiol 25:3552–9CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Watanabe H, Kanematsu M, Goshima S et al (2011) Staging hepatic fibrosis: comparison of gadoxetate disodium-enhanced and diffusion-weighted MR imaging-preliminary observations. Radiology 259:142–50CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Feier D, Balassy C, Bastati N, Fragner R, Wrba F, Ba-Ssalamah A (2016) The diagnostic efficacy of quantitative liver MR imaging with diffusion-weighted, SWI, and hepato-specific contrast-enhanced sequences in staging liver fibrosis--a multiparametric approach. Eur Radiol 26:539–46CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Pickhardt PJ, Malecki K, Kloke J, Lubner MG (2016) Accuracy of Liver Surface Nodularity Quantification on MDCT as a Noninvasive Biomarker for Staging Hepatic Fibrosis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 30:1–6 doi: 10.2214/AJR.16.16514
  26. 26.
    Honda H, Onitsuka H, Masuda K, Nishitani H, Nakata H, Watanabe K (1990) Chronic liver disease: value of volumetry of liver and spleen with computed tomography. Radiat Med 8:222–6PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Tarao K, Hoshino H, Motohashi I, Iimori K, Tamai S, Ito Y et al (1989) Changes in liver and spleen volume in alcoholic liver fibrosis of man. Hepatology 9:589–93CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Zhou XP, Lu T, Wei Y-g, Chen X-z (2007) Liver Volume Variation in Patients with Virus-Induced Cirrhosis: Findings on MDCT. AJR 189:W153–9CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Liu P, Li P, He W, Zhao LQ (2009) Liver and spleen volume variations in patients with hepatic fibrosis. World J Gastroenterol 15:3298–302CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Huber A, Ebner L, Montani M et al (2014) Computed tomography findings in liver fibrosis and cirrhosis. Swiss Med Wkly 144:w13923PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© European Society of Radiology 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Perry J. Pickhardt
    • 1
  • Kyle Malecki
    • 1
  • Oliver F. Hunt
    • 1
  • Claire Beaumont
    • 1
  • John Kloke
    • 1
  • Timothy J. Ziemlewicz
    • 1
  • Meghan G. Lubner
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of RadiologyUniversity of Wisconsin School of Medicine & Public HealthMadisonUSA

Personalised recommendations