Advertisement

Hepatology International

, Volume 12, Issue 1, pp 44–55 | Cite as

Repeated liver stiffness measurement compared with paired liver biopsy in patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease

  • Sivesh K. Kamarajah
  • Wah-Kheong Chan
  • Nik Raihan Nik Mustapha
  • Sanjiv Mahadeva
Original Article

Abstract

Introduction

The value of repeated liver stiffness measurement (LSM) in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) has not been shown before.

Methods

A longitudinal study of biopsy-proven NAFLD patients was conducted at the Asian tertiary hospital from November 2012 to January 2017. Patients with paired liver biopsies and LSM were followed prospectively for liver-related and non-liver related complications, and survival.

Results

The data for 113 biopsy-proven NAFLD patients (mean age 51.3 ± 10.6 years, male 50%) were analyzed. At baseline, advanced fibrosis based on histology and LSM was observed in 22 and 46%, respectively. Paired liver biopsy and LSM at 1-year interval was available in 71 and 80% of patients, respectively. High-risk cases (defined as patients with advanced fibrosis at baseline who had no fibrosis improvement, and patients who developed advanced fibrosis on repeat assessment) were seen in 23 and 53% of patients, based on paired liver biopsy and LSM, respectively. Type 2 diabetes mellitus was independently associated with high-risk cases. The median follow-up was 37 months with a total follow-up of 328 person-years. High-risk cases based on paired liver biopsy had significantly higher rates of liver-related complications (p = 0.002) but no difference in other outcomes. High-risk patients based on paired LSM had a significantly higher rate of liver-related complications (p = 0.046), cardiovascular events (p = 0.025) and composite outcomes (p = 0.006).

Conclusion

Repeat LSM can predict liver-related complications, similar to paired liver biopsy, and may be useful in identifying patients who may be at an increased risk of cardiovascular events. Further studies in a larger cohort and with a longer follow-up should be carried out to confirm these observations.

Keywords

Liver fibrosis Cirrhosis Fibroscan Liver biopsy NAFLD 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Madam Talvant Kaur and Ms. Wan Noor Hidayu for their assistance in the research project. (1) Guarantor of the article: CWK. (2) Specific author contributions: CWK was involved in study concept and design. SKK, CWK, NRNM, and SM were involved in acquisition of data. SKK and CWK were involved with analysis and interpretation of data. SKK and CWK were involved with drafting the manuscript. NRNM and SM were involved with critical revision of manuscript for important intellectual content. (3) All authors have approved the final version of the manuscript.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

All authors declare that they have no competing interest.

Ethical approval

This prospective study was approved by the University of Malaya Medical Centre (UMMC) Medical Ethics Committee (MEC ID no.: 20168124134).

Informed consent

All patients who participated in this study provided written informed consent.

Supplementary material

12072_2018_9843_MOESM1_ESM.docx (32.7 mb)
Supplementary File 1 Representative photos of the scoring using the Non-Alcoholic Steatohepatitis Clinical Research Network Scoring System from this study (DOCX 33512 kb)
12072_2018_9843_MOESM2_ESM.docx (35 kb)
Supplementary File 2 Profile of patients who developed cardiovascular event during the study period (DOCX 34 kb)
12072_2018_9843_MOESM3_ESM.docx (17 kb)
Supplementary Table 1 The characteristics of patients with and without advanced fibrosis based on histology at baseline (DOCX 17 kb)
12072_2018_9843_MOESM4_ESM.docx (13 kb)
Supplementary Table 2 Independent factors associated with presence of advanced fibrosis based on histology at baseline (DOCX 12 kb)
12072_2018_9843_MOESM5_ESM.docx (18 kb)
Supplementary Table 3 The characteristics of patients with and without NASH at baseline (DOCX 17 kb)
12072_2018_9843_MOESM6_ESM.docx (13 kb)
Supplementary Table 4 Independent factors associated with presence of NASH at baseline (DOCX 12 kb)
12072_2018_9843_MOESM7_ESM.docx (19 kb)
Supplementary Table 5 The characteristics of patients with and without advanced fibrosis based on LSM at baseline (DOCX 19 kb)
12072_2018_9843_MOESM8_ESM.docx (13 kb)
Supplementary Table 6 Independent factors associated with presence of advanced fibrosis based on LSM at baseline (DOCX 12 kb)
12072_2018_9843_MOESM9_ESM.docx (23 kb)
Supplementary Table 7 The number of patients with the different fibrosis stages at follow-up, stratified according to baseline fibrosis stage (based on histology) (DOCX 22 kb)
12072_2018_9843_MOESM10_ESM.docx (13 kb)
Supplementary Table 8 Independent factors associated with high risk cases (based on paired histology) (DOCX 12 kb)
12072_2018_9843_MOESM11_ESM.docx (23 kb)
Supplementary Table 9 The number of patients with the different fibrosis stages at follow-up, stratified according to baseline fibrosisstage (based on liver stiffness measurement) (DOCX 22 kb)
12072_2018_9843_MOESM12_ESM.docx (13 kb)
Supplementary Table 10 Independent factors associated with high-risk cases (based on paired LSM) (DOCX 12 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Younossi ZM, Koenig AB, Abdelatif D, Fazel Y, Henry L, Wymer M. Global epidemiology of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease-meta-analytic assessment of prevalence, incidence, and outcomes. Hepatology. 2016;64:73–84.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Goh SC, Ho EL, Goh KL. Prevalence and risk factors of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease in a multiracial suburban Asian population in Malaysia. Hepatol Int. 2013;7:548–54.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Tan EC, Tai SM, Chan WK, et al. A study of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease using transient elastography and carotid intima media thickness using ultrasonography in a middle-aged Malaysian population. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2016;31(Suppl. 3):7–441.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Vernon G, Baranova A, Younossi ZM. Systematic review: the epidemiology and natural history of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease and non-alcoholic steatohepatitis in adults. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2011;34:274–85.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wong RJ, Aguilar M, Cheung R, Perumpail RB, Harrison SA, Younossi ZM, Ahmed A. Nonalcoholic steatohepatitis is the second leading etiology of liver disease among adults awaiting liver transplantation in the United States. Gastroenterology. 2015;148:547–55.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wong RJ, Cheung R, Ahmed A. Nonalcoholic steatohepatitis is the most rapidly growing indication for liver transplantation in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma in the US. Hepatology. 2014;59:2188–95.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Musso G, Gambino R, Cassader M, Pagano G. Meta-analysis: natural history of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and diagnostic accuracy of non-invasive tests for liver disease severity. Ann Med. 2011;43:617–49.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wong VW, Vergniol J, Wong GL, Foucher J, Chan HL, Le Bail B, Choi PC, et al. Diagnosis of fibrosis and cirrhosis using liver stiffness measurement in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Hepatology. 2010;51:454–62.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chalasani N, Younossi Z, Lavine JE, Diehl AM, Brunt EM, Cusi K, Charlton M, et al. The diagnosis and management of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: practice Guideline by the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases, American College of Gastroenterology, and the American Gastroenterological Association. Hepatology. 2012;55:2005–23.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Anuurad E, Shiwaku K, Nogi A, Kitajima K, Enkhmaa B, Shimono K, Yamane Y. The new BMI criteria for asians by the regional office for the western pacific region of WHO are suitable for screening of overweight to prevent metabolic syndrome in elder Japanese workers. J Occup Health. 2003;45:335–43.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Alberti KG, Zimmet P, Shaw J. The metabolic syndrome–a new worldwide definition. Lancet. 2005;366:1059–62.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kleiner DE, Brunt EM, Van Natta M, Behling C, Contos MJ, Cummings OW, Ferrell LD, et al. Design and validation of a histological scoring system for nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Hepatology. 2005;41:1313–21.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wah Kheong C, Nik Mustapha NR, Mahadeva S. A randomized trial of Silymarin for the treatment of nonalcoholic steatohepatitis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2017;15(1940–1949):e1948.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Yoneda M, Fujita K, Inamori M, Nakajima A, Yoneda M, Tamano M, Hiraishi H. Transient elastography in patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). Gut. 2007;56:1330–1.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Karlas T, Petroff D, Sasso M, Fan JG, Mi YQ, de Ledinghen V, Kumar M, et al. Individual patient data meta-analysis of controlled attenuation parameter (CAP) technology for assessing steatosis. J Hepatol. 2017;66:1022–30.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Boursier J, Vergniol J, Guillet A, Hiriart JB, Lannes A, Le Bail B, Michalak S, et al. Diagnostic accuracy and prognostic significance of blood fibrosis tests and liver stiffness measurement by FibroScan in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. J Hepatol. 2016;65:570–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Friedrich-Rust M, Ong MF, Martens S, Sarrazin C, Bojunga J, Zeuzem S, Herrmann E. Performance of transient elastography for the staging of liver fibrosis: a meta-analysis. Gastroenterology. 2008;134:960–74.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Unalp-Arida A, Ruhl CE. Noninvasive fatty liver markers predict liver disease mortality in the US population. Hepatology. 2016;63:1170–83.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Seki K, Shima T, Oya H, Mitsumoto Y, Mizuno M, Okanoue T. Assessment of transient elastography in Japanese patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. Hepatol Res. 2017;47:882–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ekstedt M, Hagstrom H, Nasr P, Fredrikson M, Stal P, Kechagias S, Hultcrantz R. Fibrosis stage is the strongest predictor for disease-specific mortality in NAFLD after up to 33 years of follow-up. Hepatology. 2015;61:1547–54.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Petta S, Di Marco V, Camma C, Butera G, Cabibi D, Craxi A. Reliability of liver stiffness measurement in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: the effects of body mass index. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2011;33:1350–60.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Chan WK, Ida NH, Cheah PL, Goh KL. Progression of liver disease in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: a prospective clinicopathological follow-up study. J Dig Dis. 2014;15:545–52.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    McPherson S, Hardy T, Henderson E, Burt AD, Day CP, Anstee QM. Evidence of NAFLD progression from steatosis to fibrosing-steatohepatitis using paired biopsies: implications for prognosis and clinical management. J Hepatol. 2015;62:1148–55.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kwok R, Choi KC, Wong GL, Zhang Y, Chan HL, Luk AO, Shu SS, et al. Screening diabetic patients for non-alcoholic fatty liver disease with controlled attenuation parameter and liver stiffness measurements: a prospective cohort study. Gut. 2016;65:1359–68.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Asian Pacific Association for the Study of the Liver 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sivesh K. Kamarajah
    • 1
    • 2
  • Wah-Kheong Chan
    • 1
  • Nik Raihan Nik Mustapha
    • 3
  • Sanjiv Mahadeva
    • 1
  1. 1.Gastroenterology and Hepatology Unit, Department of Medicine, Faculty of MedicineUniversity of MalayaKuala LumpurMalaysia
  2. 2.College of Medical and Dental SciencesUniversity of BirminghamBirminghamUK
  3. 3.Department of PathologyHospital Sultanah BahiyahAlor SetarMalaysia

Personalised recommendations