Advertisement

European Radiology

, Volume 27, Issue 12, pp 5337–5343 | Cite as

Hepatic shear wave elastography in children under free-breathing and breath-hold conditions

  • Caroline Jung
  • Michael Groth
  • Kay Uwe Petersen
  • Anna Hammel
  • Florian Brinkert
  • Enke Grabhorn
  • Sören Alexander Weidemann
  • Jasmin Busch
  • Gerhard Adam
  • Jochen Herrmann
Ultrasound

Abstract

Objectives

To compare hepatic 2D shear wave elastography (2D SWE) in children between free-breathing and breath-hold conditions, in terms of measurement agreement and time expenditure.

Methods

A cohort of 57 children (12.7±4.3 years) who underwent standardized 2D SWE between May and October 2015 were retrospectively evaluated. Liver elastograms were obtained under free-breathing and breath-hold conditions and time expenditure was measured. Median stiffness, interquartile range (IQR), and IQR/median ratio were calculated based on 12, six, and three elastograms. Results were compared using Pearson correlation coefficient, intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), Bland-Altman analysis, and Student’s t.

Results

Median liver stiffness under free-breathing and breath-hold conditions correlated strongly (7.22±4.5kPa vs. 7.21±4.11kPa; r=0.97, P<0.001). Time to acquire 12 elastograms with free-breathing was lower than that with breath-holding (79.3±32.5sec vs. 143.7±51.8sec, P<0.001). Results for median liver stiffness based of 12, six, and three elastograms demonstrated very high agreement for free-breathing (ICC 0.993) and for breath-hold conditions (ICC 0.994).

Conclusions

Hepatic 2D SWE performed with free-breathing yields results similar to the breath-hold condition. With a substantially lower time requirement, which can be further reduced by lowering the number of elastograms, the free-breathing technique may be suitable for infants and less cooperative children not capable of breath-holding.

Key Points

Hepatic 2D SWE performed with free-breathing yields results similar to breath-hold condition.

• Benefit of the free-breathing approach is the substantially lower time requirement.

• Lowering the number of elastograms can further reduce time expenditure.

• Free-breathing 2D SWE is suitable in children with suspected liver disease.

Keywords

Liver elastography Ultrasound Shear wave Free-breathing Children 

Abbreviations

2D SWE

Two dimensional shear wave elastography

ICC

Intraclass correlation coefficient

IQR

Interquartile range

SD

Standard deviation

MRI

Magnetic resonance imaging

ROI

Region of interest

TE

Transient elastography

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Guarantor

The scientific guarantor of this publication is PD Dr. med Jochen Herrmann.

Conflict of interest

The authors of this manuscript declare no relationships with any companies, that have products or services may be related to the subject matter of the article.

Funding

The authors state that this work has not received any funding.

Statistics and biometry

One of the authors has significant statistical expertise.

Ethical approval

Institutional Review Board approval was obtained.

Informed consent

Written informed consent was waived by the Institutional Review Board.

Methodology

• retrospective

• performed at one institution

References

  1. 1.
    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 26:656–663CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Mariappan YK, Glaser KJ, Ehman RL (2010) Magnetic resonance elastography: a review. Clin Anat 23:497–511CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Rockey DC (2008) Noninvasive assessment of liver fibrosis and portal hypertension with transient elastography. Gastroenterology 134:8–14CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ferraioli G, Tinelli C, Zicchetti M et al (2012) Reproducibility of real-time shear wave elastography in the evaluation of liver elasticity. Eur J Radiol 81:3102–3106CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Barr RG, Ferraioli G, Palmeri ML et al (2015) Elastography assessment of liver fibrosis: society of radiologists in ultrasound consensus conference statement. Radiology 276:845–861CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hanquinet S, Courvoisier D, Kanavaki A, Dhouib A, Anooshiravani M (2013) Acoustic radiation force impulse imaging-normal values of liver stiffness in healthy children. Pediatr Radiol 43:539–544CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Eiler JKU, Albers D et al (2012) Standard value of ultrasound elastography using acoustic radiation force impulse imaging (ARFI) in healthy liver tissue of children and adolescents. Ultraschall in Med 33:474–479CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Shin NY, Kim MJ, Lee MJ et al (2014) Transient elastography and sonography for prediction of liver fibrosis in infants with biliary atresia. J Ultrasound Med 33:853–864CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zhou LY, Jiang H, Shan QY et al (2017) Liver stiffness measurements with supersonic shear wave elastography in the diagnosis of biliary atresia: a comparative study with grey-scale US. Eur Radiol. doi: 10.1007/s00330-016-4710-y Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Nobili V, Pinzani M (2010) Paediatric non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. Gut 59:561–564CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Tutar O, Beser OF, Adaletli I et al (2014) Shear wave elastography in the evaluation of liver fibrosis in children. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 58:750–755PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Leschied JR, Dillman JR, Bilhartz J, Heider A, Smith EA, Lopez MJ (2015) Shear wave elastography helps differentiate biliary atresia from other neonatal/infantile liver diseases. Pediatr Radiol 45:366–375CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Noruegas MJ, Matos H, Goncalves I, Cipriano MA, Sanches C (2012) Acoustic radiation force impulse-imaging in the assessment of liver fibrosis in children. Pediatr Radiol 42:201–204CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    D'Onofrio M, Gallotti A, Mucelli RP (2010) Tissue quantification with acoustic radiation force impulse imaging: measurement repeatability and normal values in the healthy liver. AJR Am J Roentgenol 195:132–136CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Toshima T, Shirabe K, Takeishi K et al (2011) New method for assessing liver fibrosis based on acoustic radiation force impulse: a special reference to the difference between right and left liver. J Gastroenterol 46:705–711CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Yoneda M, Suzuki K, Kato S et al (2010) Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: US-based acoustic radiation force impulse elastography. Radiology 256:640–647CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Chen S, Sanchez W, Callstrom MR et al (2013) Assessment of liver viscoelasticity by using shear waves induced by ultrasound radiation force. Radiology 266:964–970CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Yun MH, Seo YS, Kang HS et al (2011) The effect of the respiratory cycle on liver stiffness values as measured by transient elastography. J Viral Hepat 18:631–636CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Horster S, Mandel P, Zachoval R, Clevert DA (2010) Comparing acoustic radiation force impulse imaging to transient elastography to assess liver stiffness in healthy volunteers with and without valsalva manoeuvre. Clin Hemorheol Microcirc 46:159–168PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    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. AJR Am J Roentgenol 205:33–40CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Tang A, Cloutier G, Szeverenyi NM, Sirlin CB (2015) Ultrasound elastography and MR elastography for assessing liver fibrosis: part 1, principles and techniques. AJR Am J Roentgenol 205:22–32CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Palmeri ML, Nightingale KR (2011) Acoustic radiation force-based elasticity imaging methods. Interface Focus 1:553–564CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Frulio N, Trillaud H (2013) Ultrasound elastography in liver. Diagn Interv Imaging 94:515–534CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Franchi-Abella S, Corno L, Gonzales E et al (2016) Feasibility and diagnostic accuracy of supersonic shear-wave elastography for the assessment of liver stiffness and liver fibrosis in children: a pilot study of 96 patients. Radiology 278:554–562CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Belei O, Sporea I, Gradinaru-Tascau O et al (2016) Comparison of three ultrasound based elastographic techniques in children and adolescents with chronic diffuse liver diseases. Med Ultrason 18:145–150CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Song P, Macdonald M, Behler R et al (2015) Two-dimensional shear-wave elastography on conventional ultrasound scanners with time-aligned sequential tracking (TAST) and comb-push ultrasound shear elastography (CUSE). IEEE Trans Ultrason Ferroelectr Freq Control 62:290–302CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    (1994) Intraobserver and interobserver variations in liver biopsy interpretation in patients with chronic hepatitis C. The French METAVIR Cooperative Study Group. Hepatology 20:15–20Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Karlas T, Pfrepper C, Troeltzsch M, Wiegand J, Keim V (2010) Acoustic radiation force impulse liver stiffness measurement: interlobe differences demand standardized examination procedures. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 22:1387CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Hall TJ, Milkowski A, Garra B et al. (2013) RSNA/QIBA: Shear wave speed as a biomarker for liver fibrosis staging. 2013 Ieee International Ultrasonics Symposium (Ius).  10.1109/Ultsym.2013.0103:397–400
  30. 30.
    Ferraioli G, Tinelli C, Dal Bello B et al (2012) Accuracy of real-time shear wave elastography for assessing liver fibrosis in chronic hepatitis C: a pilot study. Hepatology 56:2125–2133CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Procopet B, Berzigotti A, Abraldes JG et al (2015) Real-time shear-wave elastography: applicability, reliability and accuracy for clinically significant portal hypertension. J Hepatol 62:1068–1075CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Huwart L, Peeters F, Sinkus R et al (2006) Liver fibrosis: non-invasive assessment with MR elastography. NMR Biomed 19:173–179CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Venkatesh SK, Yin M, Ehman RL (2013) Magnetic resonance elastography of liver: technique, analysis, and clinical applications. J Magn Reson Imaging 37:544–555CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    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 47:810–816CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Mulabecirovic ABM, A; Gilja, OH; Flesland Havre, R (2016) In vitro quantification of tissue elasticity using three shear wave elastography platforms on liver fibrosis phantoms. Ultraschall in Med 37:E9_05Google Scholar

Copyright information

© European Society of Radiology 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Caroline Jung
    • 1
  • Michael Groth
    • 2
  • Kay Uwe Petersen
    • 3
  • Anna Hammel
    • 1
  • Florian Brinkert
    • 4
  • Enke Grabhorn
    • 4
  • Sören Alexander Weidemann
    • 5
  • Jasmin Busch
    • 2
  • Gerhard Adam
    • 1
  • Jochen Herrmann
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology and Nuclear MedicineUniversity Medical Center Hamburg-EppendorfHamburgGermany
  2. 2.Section of Pediatric Radiology, Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology and Nuclear MedicineUniversity Medical Center Hamburg-EppendorfHamburgGermany
  3. 3.Section for Addiction Research and TherapyUniversity Department for Psychiatry and PsychotherapyTübingenGermany
  4. 4.Department of Pediatric GastroenterologyUniversity Medical Center Hamburg-EppendorfHamburgGermany
  5. 5.Institute of Pathology, University Medical Center Hamburg-EppendorfHamburgGermany

Personalised recommendations