SAĞLIKLI ÇOCUKLARDA KARACİĞER ELASTİKİYETİNİN pSWE VE 2D-SWE TEKNİKLERİ İLE DEĞERLENDİRİLMESİ

Abstract

Amaç Share wave elastografi (SWE), karaciğer sertliğini non-invaziv olarak değerlendirebilen yeni bir ultrasonografi tekniğidir. Yetişkinlerde SWE'nin etkinliği çok sayıda çalışmayla gösterilmiştir, ancak pediatrik gruplarda çok az SWE çalışması vardır. Karaciğer sertliği değerleri (KSD), cihaza ve kullanılan SWE yöntemine göre değişiklik gösterdiğinden, standart referans değerleri henüz oluşturulmamıştır. Bu çalışmanın amacı, iki farklı SWE yöntemine göre, sağlıklı çocuklarda normal karaciğerin referans sertlik değerlerini belirlemekti. Gereç ve Yöntem Karaciğer sertliği değerleri, 8-18 yaş arası 107 sağlıklı çocukta, iki farklı SWE yöntemi olan point SWE (pSWE) ve 2-dimentional SWE (2D-SWE) ile ölçüldü. pSWE (EPQ) ve 2D-SWE (EQI) ölçümleri aynı cihaz (Philips Epiq Elite) ile, tek seansta ve en az 4 saat aç kaldıktan sonra alındı. Cinsiyet, yaş, vücut kitle indeksi (VKİ), bazı biyokimyasal belirteçler ((açlık kan şekeri, aspartat aminotransferaz (AST), alanin aminotransferaz (ALT), albümin, trombosit, INR gibi)) ve karaciğer boyutunun, KSD’ye etkisi araştırıldı. Bulgular Ortalama KSD, pSWE ile 4,04±0,84kPa ((%95 güven aralığı (CI):3,67-4,42)) ve 2D-SWE ile 4,41±0,71kPa (%95 CI:4,09-4,72) bulundu. Üst sınır KSD'ler sırasıyla 4,42kPa ve 4,72kPa idi. 2D-SWE'de ölçülen KSD'ler, pSWE'den daha yüksekti ((sırasıyla medyan; min-maks, 4,34kPa; 2,82-6kPa ve 3,86kPa; 2,55– 5,78, (r=0,59, p<0,001)). KSD ile yaş arasında düşük düzeyde anlamlı pozitif korelasyon saptandı (r=0,267; p=0,006). Fakat karaciğer büyüklüğü, cinsiyet, VKİ ve biyokimyasal belirteçler ile KDS arasında anlamlı ilişki saptanmadı. Sonuç 8-18 yaş arası sağlıklı çocuklarda ortalama karaciğer sertliği referans değerleri, Philips Epiq Elite ultrason cihazı ile yapılan ölçümlerde, pSWE yöntemi ile 4,04±0,84kPa ve 2D-SWE yöntemi ile 4,41±0,71kPa olarak bulundu. Bu referans değerleri, kronik karaciğer hastalıklarında karaciğer parankiminin değerlendirilmesinde SWE yönteminin daha etkin kullanılmasına yardımcı olacaktır.

Keywords

• Çocuk
• karaciğer sertliği
• ultrason
• shear wave elastografi
• iki boyutlu-shear wave elastografi.

EVALUATION OF LIVER ELASTICITY USING pSWE AND 2D-SWE TECHNIQUES IN HEALTHY CHILDREN

Abstract

Objective Shear wave elastography (SWE) is a new ultrasonography technique that can non-invasively evaluate liver stiffness. The efficacy of SWE in adults has been demonstrated by numerous studies, but there are few SWE studies of pediatric groups. Since the liver stiffness values (LSV) vary according to the device and the SWE method used, standard reference values have not been established as yet. The aim of this study was to establish the reference values of normal liver stiffness in healthy children according to the two SWE methods. Materials and Method Liver stiffness values were measured using the two different SWE methods of point SWE (pSWE) and 2-dimensional SWE (2D-SWE) in 107 healthy children aged 8-18 years with no liver disease. The pSWE (EPQ) and 2D-SWE (EQI) measurements were taken in one session on the same device (Philips Epiq Elite) and after at least 4 hours of fasting. The effects on liver elasticity values were investigated of gender, age, body mass index (BMI), some biochemical markers (such as fasting blood glucose, aspartate aminotransferase (AST), alanine aminotransferase (ALT), albumin, platelet, INR) and liver size. Results The mean LSV was 4.04±0.84kPa ((95% confidence interval (CI):3.67-4.42)) on pSWE and 4.41±0.71kPa (95% CI:4.09-4.72) on 2D-SWE. The upper limit LSVs were found to be 4.42kPa and 4.72kPa, respectively. The LSVs measured on 2D-SWE were found to be higher than on pSWE ((median; min-max, 4.34kPa; 2.82-6kPa and 3.86kPa; 2.55–5.78, respectively, (r=0.59, p<0.001)). A low-level significant positive correlation was determined between LSV and age (r=0.267; p=0.006). No significant association was determined between LSV and hepatic size, gender, BMI and biochemical markers. Conclusion In healthy children aged 8-18 years, the mean liver stiffness reference values obtained on the Philips Epiq Elite ultrasound device were 4.04±0.84kPa using the pSWE method and 4.41±0.71kPa using the 2D-SWE method.These reference values will help the SWE method to be used more effectively in the evaluation of liver parenchyma in chronic liver diseases.

Keywords

• Children
• liver stiffness
• ultrasound
• shear wave elastography
• two-dimensional shear wave imaging

Supporting Institution

None

References

1. 1. Selmi B, Engelmann G, Teufel U, El Sakka S, Dadrich M, Schenk J-P. Normal values of liver elasticity measured by real-time tissue elastography (RTE) in healthy infants and children. J Med Ultrason. 2014;41(1):31–8.
2. 2. Shiina T, Nightingale KR, Palmeri ML, Hall TJ, Bamber JC, Barr RG, et al. WFUMB guidelines and recommendations for clinical use of ultrasound elastography: Part 1: basic principles and terminology. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2015;41(5):1126–47.
3. 3. Sharma S, Khalili K, Nguyen GC. Non-invasive diagnosis of advanced fibrosis and cirrhosis. World J Gastroenterol WJG. 2014;20(45):16820.
4. 4. Zhou H, Zhou Y, Ding J, Chen Y, Wen J, Zhao L, et al. Clinical evaluation of grayscale and linear scale hepatorenal indices for fatty liver quantification: a prospective study of a native Chinese population. Abdom Radiol. 2022;47(4):1321–32.
5. 5. Ferraioli G, Wong VW-S, Castera L, Berzigotti A, Sporea I, Dietrich CF, et al. Liver ultrasound elastography: an update to the world federation for ultrasound in medicine and bi- ology guidelines and recommendations. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2018;44(12):2419–40.
6. 6. Belei O, Sporea I, Gradinaru-Tascau O, Olariu L, Popescu A, Simedrea I, et al. Comparison of three ultrasound based elastographic techniques in children and adolescents with chronic diffuse liver diseases. Med Ultrason. 2016;18(2):145–50.
7. 7. Ferraioli G, Tinelli C, Dal Bello B, Zicchetti M, Filice G, Filice C, et al. Accuracy of real‐time shear wave elastography for assessing liver fibrosis in chronic hepatitis C: a pilot study. Hepatology. 2012;56(6):2125–33.
8. 8. Tutar O, Beser ÖF, Adaletli I, Tunc N, Gulcu D, Kantarci F, et al. Shear wave elastography in the evaluation of liver fibrosis in children. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2014;58(6):750–5.

9. 9. Altay C, Seçil M. Sonoelastografinin Temel İlkeleri. 2019;
10. 10. Tran LC, Ley D, Bourdon G, Coopman S, Lerisson H, Tillaux C, et al. Noninvasive Pediatric Liver Fibrosis Measurement: Two-Dimensional Shear Wave Elastography Compared With Transient Elastography. Front Pediatr. 2022;10.
11. 11. Fitzpatrick E, Quaglia A, Vimalesvaran S, Basso MS, Dhawan A. Transient elastography is a useful noninvasive tool for the evaluation of fibrosis in paediatric chronic liver disease. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2013;56(1):72–6.
12. 12. Xie L-T, Yan C-H, Zhao Q-Y, He M-N, Jiang T-A. Quantitative and noninvasive assessment of chronic liver diseases using two-dimensional shear wave elastography. World J Gastroenterol. 2018;24(9):957.
13. 13. Shin HJ, Kim M-J, Kim HY, Roh YH, Lee M-J. Optimal acquisition number for hepatic shear wave velocity measurements in children. PLoS One. 2016;11(12):e0168758.
14. 14. Franchi-Abella S, Corno L, Gonzales E, Antoni G, Fabre M, Ducot B, et al. 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. 2016;278(2):554–62.
15. 15. Galina P, Alexopoulou E, Zellos A, Grigoraki V, Siahanidou T, Kelekis NL, et al. Performance of two--dimensional ultrasound shear wave elastography: reference values of normal liver stiffness in children. Pediatr Radiol. 2019;49(1):91–8.
16. 16. Barr RG, Ferraioli G, Palmeri ML, Goodman ZD, Garcia-Tsao G, Rubin J, et al. Elastography assessment of liver fibrosis: society of radiologists in ultrasound consensus conference statement. Ultrasound Q. 2016;32(2):94–107.
17. 17. Fang C, Jaffer OS, Yusuf GT, Konstantatou E, Quinlan DJ, Agarwal K, et al. Reducing the number of measurements in liver point shear-wave elastography: factors that influence the number and reliability of measurements in assessment of liver fibrosis in clinical practice. Radiology. 2018;287(3):844–52.
18. 18. Jung C, Groth M, Petersen KU, Hammel A, Brinkert F, Grabhorn E, et al. Hepatic shear wave elastography in children under free-breathing and breath-hold conditions. Eur Radiol. 2017;27(12):5337–43.
19. 19. Dietrich CF, Bamber J, Berzigotti A, Bota S, Cantisani V, Castera L, et al. EFSUMB guidelines and recommendations on the clinical use of liver ultrasound elastography, update 2017 (long version). Ultraschall der Medizin-European J Ultrasound. 2017;38(04):e16–47.
20. 20. Mărginean CO, Meliţ LE, Ghiga DV, Săsăran MO. Reference values of normal liver stiffness in healthy children by two methods: 2D shear wave and transient elastography. Sci Rep. 2020;10(1):1–10.
21. 21. Mjelle AB, Mulabecirovic A, Havre RF, Rosendahl K, Juliusson PB, Olafsdottir E, et al. Normal liver stiffness values in children: a comparison of three different elastography methods. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2019;68(5):706.
22. 22. Mulabecirovic A, Mjelle AB, Gilja OH, Vesterhus M, Havre RF. Liver elasticity in healthy individuals by two novel shear-wave elastography systems—Comparison by age, gender, BMI and number of measurements. PLoS One. 2018;13(9):e0203486.
23. 23. Tokuhara D, Cho Y, Shintaku H. Transient elastography-based liver stiffness age-dependently increases in children. PLoS One. 2016;11(11):e0166683.
24. 24. Lewindon PJ, Balouch F, Pereira TN, Puertolas‐Lopez M V, Noble C, Wixey JA, et al. Transient liver elastography in unsedated control children: Impact of age and intercurrent illness. J Paediatr Child Health. 2016;52(6):637–42.
25. 25. Engelmann G, Gebhardt C, Wenning D, Wühl E, Hoffmann GF, Selmi B, et al. Feasibility study and control values of transient elastography in healthy children. Eur J Pediatr. 2012;171:353– 60.
26. 26. Huang Z, Zheng J, Zeng J, Wang X, Wu T, Zheng R. Normal liver stiffness in healthy adults assessed by real-time shear wave elastography and factors that influence this method. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2014;40(11):2549–55.
27. 27. Fang C, Sidhu PS. Ultrasound-based liver elastography: current results and future perspectives. Abdom Radiol. 2020;45:3463– 72.
28. 28. Sirli R, Sporea I, Tudora A, Deleanu A, Popescu A. Transient elastographic evaluation of subjects without known hepatic pathology: does age change the liver stiffness. J Gastrointestin Liver Dis. 2009;18(1):57–60.
29. 29. Corpechot C, Naggar EA, Poupon R. Gender and liver: is the liver stiffness weaker in weaker sex? Hepatology. 2006;44(2):513–4.
30. 30. Goldschmidt I, Streckenbach C, Dingemann C, Pfister ED, di Nanni A, Zapf A, et al. Application and limitations of transient liver elastography in children. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2013;57(1):109–13.
31. 31. Son CY, Kim SU, Han WK, Choi GH, Park H, Yang SC, et al. Normal liver elasticity values using acoustic radiation force impulse imaging: a prospective study in healthy living liver and kidney donors. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2012;27(1):130–6.
32. 32. Horster S, Mandel P, Zachoval R, Clevert DA. Comparing acoustic radiation force impulse imaging to transient elastography to assess liver stiffness in healthy volunteers with and without valsalva manoeuvre. Clin Hemorheol Microcirc. 2010;46(2–3):159–68.
33. 33. Madhok R, Tapasvi C, Prasad U, Gupta AK, Aggarwal A. Acoustic radiation force impulse imaging of the liver: measurement of the normal mean values of the shearing wave velocity in a healthy liver. J Clin diagnostic Res JCDR. 2013;7(1):39.
34. 34. Bailey SS, Youssfi M, Patel M, Hu HH, Shaibi GQ, Towbin RB. Shear-wave ultrasound elastography of the liver in normal-weight and obese children.Acta radiol.2017;58(12):1511–8.