Singh S, Venkatesh SK Keaveny A, Keaveny S, Miller FH, Godfrey EM, Silva AC, Wang Z, Hassan MM, Asrani SK, Lomas DJ, Ehman RL

Language: English
References: 26
Page: 363-376
PDF size: 179.21 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Background and aims. We conducted an individual participant data (IPD) pooled analysis on the diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance elastography (MRE) to detect fibrosis stage in liver transplant recipients. Material and methods. Through a systematic literature search, we identified studies on diagnostic performance of MRE for staging liver fibrosis, using liver biopsy as gold standard. We contacted study authors for published and unpublished IPD on age, sex, body mass index, liver stiffness, fibrosis stage, degree of inflammation and interval between MRE and biopsy; from these we limited analysis to patients who had undergone liver transplantation. Through pooled analysis using nonparametric two-stage receiver-operating curve (ROC) regression models, we calculated the cluster-adjusted AUROC, sensitivity and specificity of MRE for any (≥ stage 1), significant (≥ stage 2) and advanced fibrosis (≥ stage 3) and cirrhosis (stage 4). Results. We included 6 cohorts (4 published and 2 unpublished series) reporting on 141 liver transplant recipients (mean age, 57 years; 75.2% male; mean BMI, 27.1 kg/m²). Fibrosis stage distribution stage 0, 1, 2, 3, or 4, was 37.6%, 23.4%, 24.8%, 12% and 2.2%, respectively. Mean AUROC values (and 95% confidence intervals) for diagnosis of any (≥ stage 1), significant (≥ stage 2), or advanced fibrosis (≥ stage 3) and cirrhosis were 0.73 (0.66-0.81), 0.69 (0.62-0.74), 0.83 (0.61-0.88) and 0.96 (0.93-0.98), respectively. Similar diagnostic performance was observed in stratified analysis based on sex, obesity and inflammation grade. Conclusions. In conclusion, MRE has high diagnostic accuracy for detection of advanced fibrosis and cirrhosis in liver transplant recipients, independent of BMI and degree of inflammation.

REFERENCES

1. Kim WR, Lake JR, Smith JM, Skeans MA, Schladt DP, Edwards EB, Harper AM, et al. OPTN/SRTR 2013 Annual Data Report: liver. Am J Transplant 2015; 15(Suppl. 2): 1-28. Doi: 10.1111/ajt.13197.

2. Zahr Eldeen F, Mabrouk Mourad M, Liossis C, Bramhall SR. Liver retransplant for primary disease recurrence. Exp Clin Transplant 2014; 12: 175-83.

3. Bravo AA, Sheth SG, Chopra S. Liver biopsy. N Engl J Med 2001; 344: 495-500. Doi: 10.1056/NEJM200102153440706.

4. Castera L. Noninvasive methods to assess liver disease in patients with hepatitis B or C. Gastroenterology 2012; 142: 1293-1302. e4. Doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2012.02.017.

5. Venkatesh SK, Yin M, Ehman RL. Magnetic resonance elastography of liver: technique, analysis, and clinical applications. J Magn Reson Imaging 2013; 37: 544-55. Doi: 10.1002/jmri.23731.

6. Singh S, Venkatesh SK, Wang Z, Miller FH, Motosugi U, Low RN, Hassanein T, et al. Diagnostic Performance of Magnetic Resonance Elastography in Staging Liver Fibrosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Individual Participant Data. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2014. Doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2014.09.046.

7. Riley RD, Lambert PC, Abo-Zaid G. Meta-analysis of individual participant data: rationale, conduct, and reporting. BMJ 2010: 340:c221. Doi: 10.1136/bmj.c221.

8. Bedossa P, Poynard T. An algorithm for the grading of activity in chronic hepatitis C. The METAVIR Cooperative Study Group. Hepatology 1996; 24: 289-93. Doi: 10.1002/hep.510240201.

9. Whiting PF, Rutjes AW, Westwood ME, Mallett S, Deeks JJ, Reitsma JB, Leeflang MM, et al. QUADAS-2: a revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. Ann Intern Med 2011; 155: 529-36. Doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-155-8-201110180-00009.

10. Pepe M, Longton G, Janes H. Estimation and Comparison of Receiver Operating Characteristic Curves. Stata J 2009; 9:1. 11. Youden WJ. Index for rating diagnostic tests. Cancer 1950; 3: 32-5.

11. Jaeschke R, Guyatt GH, Sackett DL. Users’ guides to the medical literature. III. How to use an article about a diagnostic test. B. What are the results and will they help me in caring for my patients? The Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. JAMA 1994; 271: 703-7.

12. Altman DG, Bland JM. Interaction revisited: the difference between two estimates. BMJ 2003; 326: 219.

13. Crespo S, Bridges M, Nakhleh R, McPhail A, Pungpapong S, Keaveny AP. Non-invasive assessment of liver fibrosis using magnetic resonance elastography in liver transplant recipients with hepatitis C. Clin Transplant 2013. Doi: 10.1111/ctr.12180.

14. Klatt D AP, Kamphues C, Hirsch S, Papazoglou S, Braun J, Sack I. MR elastography of liver transplant patients using parallel imaging techniques. Proc Intl Soc Mag Reson Med 2011; 19: 1485.

15. Godfrey EM, Patterson AJ, Priest AN, Davies SE, Joubert I, Krishnan AS, Griffin N, et al. A comparison of MR elastography and 31P MR spectroscopy with histological staging of liver fibrosis. Eur Radiol 2012; 22: 2790-7. Doi: 10.1007/s00330-012-2527-x.

16. Wang Y, Ganger DR, Levitsky J, Sternick LA, McCarthy RJ, Chen ZE, Fasanati CW, et al. Assessment of chronic hepatitis and fibrosis: comparison of MR elastography and diffusion- weighted imaging. AJR 2011; 196: 553-61. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.2214/AJR.10.4580.

17. Adebajo CO, Talwalkar JA, Poterucha JJ, Kim WR, Charlton MR. Ultrasound-based transient elastography for the detection of hepatic fibrosis in patients with recurrent hepatitis C virus after liver transplantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Liver Transpl 2012; 18: 323-31. Doi: 10.1002/lt.22460.

18. Castera L, Foucher J, Bernard PH, Carvalho F, Allaix D, Merrouche W, Couzigou P, et al. Pitfalls of liver stiffness measurement: a 5-year prospective study of 13,369 examinations. Hepatology 2010; 51: 828-35. Doi: 10.1002/hep.23425.

19. Bota S, Sporea I, Sirli R, Popescu A, Danila M, Jurchis A, Gradinaru-Tascau O. Factors associated with the impossibility to obtain reliable liver stiffness measurements by means of Acoustic Radiation Force Impulse (ARFI) elastography–analysis of a cohort of 1,031 subjects. Eur J Radiol 2014; 83: 268-72. Doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2013.11.019.

20. Myers RP, Pomier-Layrargues G, Kirsch R, Pollett A, Beaton M, Levstik M, Duarte-Rojo A, et al. Discordance in fibrosis staging between liver biopsy and transient elastography using the FibroScan XL probe. J Hepatol 2012; 56: 564-70. Doi: 10.1016/j.jhep.2011.10.007.

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. Doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2036.2011.04668.x.

22. Myers RP, Pomier-Layrargues G, Kirsch R, Pollett A, Duarte- Rojo A, Wong D, Beaton M, et al. Feasibility and diagnostic performance of the FibroScan XL probe for liver stiffness measurement in overweight and obese patients. Hepatology 2012; 55: 199-208. Doi: 10.1002/hep.24624.

23. Sagir A, Erhardt A, Schmitt M, Haussinger D. Transient elastography is unreliable for detection of cirrhosis in patients with acute liver damage. Hepatology 2008: 47: 592-5. Doi:10.1002/hep.22056.

24. Ichikawa S, Motosugi U, Nakazawa T, Morisaka H, Sano K, Ichikawa T, Enomoto N, et al. Hepatitis activity should be considered a confounder of liver stiffness measured with MR elastography. J Magn Reson Imaging 2015; 41: 1203-8.

25. Huwart L, Sempoux C, Vicaut E, Salameh N, Annet L, Danse E, Peeters F, et al. Magnetic resonance elastography for the noninvasive staging of liver fibrosis. Gastroenterology 2008; 135: 32-40. Doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2008.03.076.

26. Bohte AE, de Niet A, Jansen L, Bipat S, Nederveen AJ, Verheij J, Terpstra V, et al. Non-invasive evaluation of liver fibrosis: a comparison of ultrasound-based transient elastography and MR elastography in patients with viral hepatitis B and C. Eur Radiol 2014; 24: 638-48. Doi: 10.1007/s00330-013-3046-0.