Objective: This study aims to assess the diagnostic utility of ultrasonography and which methods of measuring attenuation on computed tomography scans is best for detection and grading of hepatic fat content in patients with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. Materials and Methods: This study included 65 patients, withchronic hepatitis C virus infection, who had liver biopsies as a part of pre-requirement for interferon therapy. All patients submitted to ultrasound; non enhanced and enhanced CT. Attenuation measurements were obtained from 3 regions of interest in the liver and three in the spleen on both unenhanced and portal phase contrast-enhanced CT images. Hepatic attenuation measurements were analyzed both with and without normalization with the spleen. Normalization included both differences and ratios between hepatic and splenic attenuation values. Average attenuation values of the liver were compared with pathologic fat content, as were the differences and ratios between hepatic and splenic attenuation values. Results: Ultrasound had a sensitivity of 76% and specificity 73.3% in the diagnosis of hepatic steatosis. Also ultrasound accurately graded 41 out of the 65 (63.1%) patients included in the study. The simple measurement of hepatic attenuation on non enhanced CT (CTL) had the best parameters for diagnosis of hepatic steatosis with sensitivity 83%, specificity 93.3% and positive predictive value (PPV) 97.6%. All series of R2 values for the unenhanced CT scans were higher than those for the contrast-enhanced images. The R2 values for simple liver attenuation measurement without comparison with splenic attenuation were higher than the values in which splenic measurements were considered. Conclusion: Ultrasound and non enhanced CT can be used as screening tools for detection of hepatic steatosis in patients with chronic hepatitis C virus patients. Simple measurement of hepatic attenuation on unenhanced CT is more accurate than differential liver spleen values. Also, unenhanced CT can differentiate between mild-moderate and severe steatosis.
| Published in | International Journal of Medical Imaging (Volume 2, Issue 5) |
| DOI | 10.11648/j.ijmi.20140205.14 |
| Page(s) | 112-118 |
| Creative Commons |
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited. |
| Copyright |
Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Science Publishing Group |
Hepatic Steatosis, CT, Ultrasound, Hepatitis C Viral Infection
| [1] | Neuschwander-Tetri BA, Caldwell SH. Nonalcoholic steatohepatitis: summary of an AASLD Single Topic Conference. Hepatology. 2003;37:1202–1219. |
| [2] | Hwang SJ, Lee SD. Hepatic steatosis and hepatitis C: Still unhappy bedfellows?. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2011;26 Suppl 1:96-101 |
| [3] | Ford ES, Giles WH, Mokdad AH. Increasing prevalence of the metabolic syndrome among U.S. adults. Diabetes Care 2004 ; 27 (10): 2444 – 2449 |
| [4] | Festi D, Colecchia A, Sacco T, et al. Hepatic steatosis in obese patients: clinical aspects and prognostic significance. Obes Rev 2004;5:27–42. |
| [5] | Negro F. Mechanisms and significance of liver steatosis in hepatitis C virus infection. World J Gastroenterol 2006;12:6756–6765. |
| [6] | Bravo AA, Sheth SG, Chopra S. Liver biopsy. N Engl J Med.2001;344:495–500. |
| [7] | Mihăilescu DM, Gui V, Toma CI, et al. Computer aided diagnosis method for steatosis rating in ultrasound images using random forests. Med Ultrason 2013, Vol. 15, no. 3, 184-190. |
| [8] | Hepburn MJ, Vos JA, Fillman EP, Lawitz EJ. The accuracy of the report of hepatic steatosis on ultrasonography in patients infected with hepatitis C in a clinical setting: a retrospective observational study. BMC Gastroenterol 2005;5:14 |
| [9] | Hepburn MJ, Vos JA, Fillman EP, and Lawitz EJ: The accuracy of the report of hepatic steatosis on ultrasonography in patients infected with hepatitis C in a clinical setting: A retrospective observational study. BMC Gastroenterol. 2005;5: 14. |
| [10] | Wang B, Gao Z, Zou Q, Li L. Quantitative diagnosis of fatty liver with dual-energy CT: an experimental study in rabbits.Acta Radiol 2003; 44:92–97. |
| [11] | Kammen BF, Pacharn P, Thoeni RF, et al. Focal fatty infiltration of the liver: analysis of prevalence and CT findings in children and young adults. AJR 2001; 177:1035–1039 |
| [12] | Ricci C, Longo R, Gioulis E, et al. Noninvasive in vivo quantitative assessment of fat content in human liver. JHepatol 1997; 27:108–113 |
| [13] | Taylor KJ, Gorelick FS, Rosenfield AT, Riely CA.Ultrasonography of alcoholic liver disease with histological correlation. Radiology. 1981;141:157–61. |
| [14] | Kleiner DN, Brunt EM, Van Natta M, Behling C, Contos MJ, Cumming OW, et al. Design and validation of histological scoring system for nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Hepatology. 2005; 41: 1313-1321. |
| [15] | Dipl Geogr CF, Mohamed MK, Strickland G, Lavanchy D c,et al. The role of parenteral antischistosomal therapy in the spread of hepatitis C virus in Egypt. The Lancet, 2000; 887 -891. |
| [16] | Adenolfi LE, Restive L, Marrone A. The predictive value of steatosis in hepatitis C virus infection. Expert Rev Gatroenterol Hepatol 2013; 205-213. |
| [17] | Kutcher R, Smith GS, Sen F, et al. Comparison of sonograms and liver histologic findings in patients with chronic hepatitis C virus infection. J Ultrasound Med. 1998;17:321–325. |
| [18] | Hepburn MJ, Vos JA, Fillman EP, and Lawitz EJ: The accuracy of the report of hepatic steatosis on ultrasonography in patients infected with hepatitis C in a clinical setting: Aretrospective observational study. BMC Gastroenterol. 2005;5: 14. |
| [19] | Fontana RJ, Lok AS. Noninvasive monitoring of patients with chronic hepatitis C. Hepatology. 2002;36:S57–S64. |
| [20] | Monto A, Alonzo J, Watson JJ, Grunfeld C, Wright TL.Steatosis in chronic hepatitis C: relative contributions of obesity, diabetes mellitus, and alcohol. Hepatology.2002;36:729–736. |
| [21] | Fishbein M, Castro F, Cheruku S, Jain S, Webb B, Gleason T,Stevens WR. Hepatic MRI for fat quantitation: itsrelationship to fat morphology, diagnosis, and ultrasound. J Clin Gastroenterol 2005; 39: 619-625 |
| [22] | Pacifico L, Celestre M, Anania C, Paolantonio P, Chiesa C,Laghi A. MRI and ultrasound for hepatic fat quantification relationships to clinical and metabolic characteristics of pediatric nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Acta Paediatr 2007;96: 542-547 |
| [23] | Joseph AE, Saverymuttu SH, al-Sam S, Cook MG, Maxwell JD. Comparison of liver histology with ultrasonography in assessing diffuse parenchymal liver disease. Clin Radiol1991; 43: 26-31 |
| [24] | Needleman L, Kurtz AB, Rifkin MD, Cooper HS, Pasto ME,Goldberg BB. Sonography of diffuse benign liver disease:accuracy of pattern recognition and grading. AJR Am JRoentgenol 1986; 146: 1011-1015 |
| [25] | Bydder GM, Chapman RW, Harry D, Bassan L, Sherlock S,Kreel L. Computed tomography attenuation values in fatty liver. J Comput Tomogr. 1981 Mar;5(1):33-5. |
| [26] | Ricci C, Longo R, Gioulis E, et al. Noninvasive in vivo quantitative assessment of fat content in human liver. JHepatol 1997; 27:108–113 |
| [27] | Wang B, Gao Z, Zou Q, Li L. Quantitative diagnosis of fatty liver with dual-energy CT: an experimental study in rabbits.Acta Radiol 2003; 44:92–97 |
| [28] | Lee SW, Park SH , Kim KW , et al . Unenhanced CT for assessment of macrovesicular hepatic steatosis in living liver donors: comparison of visual grading with liver attenuation index . Radiology 2007 ; 244 ( 2 ): 479 – 485 . |
| [29] | Limanond P , Raman SS , Lassman C , et al .Macrovesicular hepatic steatosis in living related liver donors: correlation between CT and histologic fi ndings . Radiology 2004 ;230 (1): 276 – 280 . |
| [30] | van Werven JR, Marsman HA, Nederveen AJ, et al.Assessment of hepatic steatosis in patients undergoing liver resection: comparison of US, CT, T1-weighted dual-echo MR imaging, and point-resolved 1H MR spectroscopy. Radiology.2010 Jul;256(1):159-68 |
| [31] | Qayyum A, Chen DM, Breiman RS, Westphalen AC, Yeh BM, Jones KD, Lu Y, Coakley FV, Callen PW. Evaluation of diffuse liver steatosis by ultrasound, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging: which modality is best?.Clin Imaging. 2009 Mar-Apr;33(2):110-5 |
| [32] | Park SH , Kim PN, Kim KW , et al . Macrovesicular hepatic steatosis in living liver donors: use of CT for quantitative and qualitative assessment. Radiology 2006 ; 239 ( 1 ):105 – 112 . |
| [33] | Lawrence DA, Oliva IB, Israel GM. Detection of hepatic steatosis on contrast-enhanced CT images: diagnostic accuracy of identification of areas of presumed focal fatty sparing. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2012;199:44-7. |
APA Style
Manal Ezzat Badawy, Mohamed Fouad Sherif, Elsayed Tharwa. (2014). Accuracy of Ultrasonography and Different CT Techniques in Diagnosis and Grading of Hepatic Steatosis in Chronic Hepatitis C Virus Patients. International Journal of Medical Imaging, 2(5), 112-118. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijmi.20140205.14
ACS Style
Manal Ezzat Badawy; Mohamed Fouad Sherif; Elsayed Tharwa. Accuracy of Ultrasonography and Different CT Techniques in Diagnosis and Grading of Hepatic Steatosis in Chronic Hepatitis C Virus Patients. Int. J. Med. Imaging 2014, 2(5), 112-118. doi: 10.11648/j.ijmi.20140205.14
AMA Style
Manal Ezzat Badawy, Mohamed Fouad Sherif, Elsayed Tharwa. Accuracy of Ultrasonography and Different CT Techniques in Diagnosis and Grading of Hepatic Steatosis in Chronic Hepatitis C Virus Patients. Int J Med Imaging. 2014;2(5):112-118. doi: 10.11648/j.ijmi.20140205.14
Share This Article
Twitter
Linked In
Facebook
Copy
Download@article{10.11648/j.ijmi.20140205.14,
author = {Manal Ezzat Badawy and Mohamed Fouad Sherif and Elsayed Tharwa},
title = {Accuracy of Ultrasonography and Different CT Techniques in Diagnosis and Grading of Hepatic Steatosis in Chronic Hepatitis C Virus Patients},
journal = {International Journal of Medical Imaging},
volume = {2},
number = {5},
pages = {112-118},
doi = {10.11648/j.ijmi.20140205.14},
url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijmi.20140205.14},
eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijmi.20140205.14},
abstract = {Objective: This study aims to assess the diagnostic utility of ultrasonography and which methods of measuring attenuation on computed tomography scans is best for detection and grading of hepatic fat content in patients with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. Materials and Methods: This study included 65 patients, withchronic hepatitis C virus infection, who had liver biopsies as a part of pre-requirement for interferon therapy. All patients submitted to ultrasound; non enhanced and enhanced CT. Attenuation measurements were obtained from 3 regions of interest in the liver and three in the spleen on both unenhanced and portal phase contrast-enhanced CT images. Hepatic attenuation measurements were analyzed both with and without normalization with the spleen. Normalization included both differences and ratios between hepatic and splenic attenuation values. Average attenuation values of the liver were compared with pathologic fat content, as were the differences and ratios between hepatic and splenic attenuation values. Results: Ultrasound had a sensitivity of 76% and specificity 73.3% in the diagnosis of hepatic steatosis. Also ultrasound accurately graded 41 out of the 65 (63.1%) patients included in the study. The simple measurement of hepatic attenuation on non enhanced CT (CTL) had the best parameters for diagnosis of hepatic steatosis with sensitivity 83%, specificity 93.3% and positive predictive value (PPV) 97.6%. All series of R2 values for the unenhanced CT scans were higher than those for the contrast-enhanced images. The R2 values for simple liver attenuation measurement without comparison with splenic attenuation were higher than the values in which splenic measurements were considered. Conclusion: Ultrasound and non enhanced CT can be used as screening tools for detection of hepatic steatosis in patients with chronic hepatitis C virus patients. Simple measurement of hepatic attenuation on unenhanced CT is more accurate than differential liver spleen values. Also, unenhanced CT can differentiate between mild-moderate and severe steatosis.},
year = {2014}
}
TY - JOUR T1 - Accuracy of Ultrasonography and Different CT Techniques in Diagnosis and Grading of Hepatic Steatosis in Chronic Hepatitis C Virus Patients AU - Manal Ezzat Badawy AU - Mohamed Fouad Sherif AU - Elsayed Tharwa Y1 - 2014/09/30 PY - 2014 N1 - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijmi.20140205.14 DO - 10.11648/j.ijmi.20140205.14 T2 - International Journal of Medical Imaging JF - International Journal of Medical Imaging JO - International Journal of Medical Imaging SP - 112 EP - 118 PB - Science Publishing Group SN - 2330-832X UR - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijmi.20140205.14 AB - Objective: This study aims to assess the diagnostic utility of ultrasonography and which methods of measuring attenuation on computed tomography scans is best for detection and grading of hepatic fat content in patients with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. Materials and Methods: This study included 65 patients, withchronic hepatitis C virus infection, who had liver biopsies as a part of pre-requirement for interferon therapy. All patients submitted to ultrasound; non enhanced and enhanced CT. Attenuation measurements were obtained from 3 regions of interest in the liver and three in the spleen on both unenhanced and portal phase contrast-enhanced CT images. Hepatic attenuation measurements were analyzed both with and without normalization with the spleen. Normalization included both differences and ratios between hepatic and splenic attenuation values. Average attenuation values of the liver were compared with pathologic fat content, as were the differences and ratios between hepatic and splenic attenuation values. Results: Ultrasound had a sensitivity of 76% and specificity 73.3% in the diagnosis of hepatic steatosis. Also ultrasound accurately graded 41 out of the 65 (63.1%) patients included in the study. The simple measurement of hepatic attenuation on non enhanced CT (CTL) had the best parameters for diagnosis of hepatic steatosis with sensitivity 83%, specificity 93.3% and positive predictive value (PPV) 97.6%. All series of R2 values for the unenhanced CT scans were higher than those for the contrast-enhanced images. The R2 values for simple liver attenuation measurement without comparison with splenic attenuation were higher than the values in which splenic measurements were considered. Conclusion: Ultrasound and non enhanced CT can be used as screening tools for detection of hepatic steatosis in patients with chronic hepatitis C virus patients. Simple measurement of hepatic attenuation on unenhanced CT is more accurate than differential liver spleen values. Also, unenhanced CT can differentiate between mild-moderate and severe steatosis. VL - 2 IS - 5 ER -
Information
Email: