Transient Elastography
Liver fibrosis can be staged using FibroScan™ (Echosens, Paris, France), a one-dimensional ultrasound transient elastography (TE), which measures the velocity of a low-frequency (50 Hz) elastic shear wave, emitted from the ultrasound probe, propagating through the liver [
38]. The
elastic modulus underpins the measure, i.e. the stiffer the tissue, the faster the shear wave velocity. The liver stiffness (LSM) is measured through a cylindrical volume 1 cm wide and 4 cm long, 2–7 cm below the skin surface. Results are expressed as kilopascals (kPa) using the median of ten valid measurements with a range of 2.5–75 kPa; normal liver has a value of < 5.5 kPa [
38]. It is the most commonly used and most validated imaging method for non-invasive assessment of liver fibrosis currently available.
A recent meta-analysis of the use of TE in patients with NAFLD (9 studies, 1047 patients) suggests that TE has excellent diagnostic accuracy for cirrhosis (92% specificity and 92% sensitivity), good accuracy for F3 (82% specificity and 85% sensitivity), but modest accuracy for F2 (75% specificity, 79% sensitivity) [
39]. Despite this, TE can rule out cirrhosis with a high NPV (~ 90%) [
40]. One of the challenges of using TE is determining the optimum cut-off for diagnosing a specific stage of fibrosis. Generally, a very low LSM is very good at ruling out significant liver fibrosis and a very high LSM indicates cirrhosis with high probability. However, intermediate LSM readings are less accurate, and the choice of a specific cut-off becomes a real balance between specificity and sensitivity. For example, for a diagnosis of cirrhosis, LSM cut-offs between 10.3–17.5 kPa will yield sensitivity of 78 to 100% and specificity of 82 to 98% [
39]. Therefore, clinicians may use different cut-offs for different stages of fibrosis in different environments depending whether they want to exclude or diagnose a fibrosis stage with high probability. In general, a cut-off of < 8 kPa (or 7.2 kPa for the XL probe) reliably excludes advanced fibrosis (F3–4) and a cut-off > 9.6 kPa is suggestive of F3–4.
A recent population-based, cross-sectional study illustrates the utility of TE as a non-invasive fibrosis marker in detecting clinically relevant liver fibrosis in the community. A total of 3041 participants (aged ≥ 45 years) from Holland underwent TE with LSM ≥ 8.0 kPa, defined as the surrogate marker of clinically relevant liver fibrosis [
41•]. Of those with reliable LSM, overall 169 (5.6%) demonstrated LSM ≥ 8.0 kPa, and this increased to 8.4% in participants with steatosis on ultrasonography and further increased to 17.2% in those with steatosis and type 2 diabetes [
41•]. These findings were consistent with another prospective study from Hong Kong in diabetic patients (
n = 1918) which found that 17.7% of patients had an increased LSM (≥ 9.6 kPa by M probe and ≥ 9.6 kPa by XL probe) [
42•]. Of those patients that underwent liver biopsy, 50% were subsequently diagnosed with advanced fibrosis [
42•]. Both these studies indicated the potential to use TE in the community to identify individuals with undiagnosed significant liver disease.
Although the value of TE is clear, it is now recognized that hepatic steatosis has an impact on the accuracy of LSM. This was demonstrated in a recent study of 253 patients with NAFLD, which showed that patients without significant fibrosis (F0–F1) or severe fibrosis (F0–F2) had a higher rate of false-positive LSM results for F3–4 when severe steatosis (≥ 66%) was present compared to those with lesser degrees of steatosis (F0–F1 23.6 vs. 14.9%, F0–F2 33.3 vs. 13.2%, respectively) [
43•]. Building on these findings, another study assessed the effect of CAP values on accuracy of LSM in 324 patients with NAFLD using the M probe [
44]. CAP values were classified into tertiles (lower 132–298, middle 299–338, higher 339–400 dB/m). Among patients with F0–F2, mean LSM values increased according to CAP tertiles (6.8 versus 8.6 versus 9.4,
p < 0.001). Moreover AUROCs for the diagnosis of F3–F4 with LSM progressively reduced with increasing CAP tertiles (0.915, 0.830 and 0.806), and false-positive rates for F3–F4 increased with increasing CAP (7.2% in lower versus 16.6% in middle versus 18.1% in higher CAP tertiles) [
44]. Both studies elegantly define the effect of steatosis on fibrosis prediction, but further studies will need to assess the effect of CAP on LSM values using the XL probe.
A major challenge of using TE in patients with NAFLD is the failure rate (no/insufficient valid measurements) or unreliable results (IQR/LSM ≥ 30% in patients with LSM ≥ 7.1 kPa), which was seen in 14.4 and 8.9% of cases, respectively, in one of the recent well-conducted NAFLD studies [
45••]. In the largest series to date (≥ 13,000 examinations in 7261 European patients), LSM failure and unreliable results were independently associated with BMI ≥ 30 kg/m
2, age, hypertension, diabetes, operator experience and female gender [
46].
As mentioned previously, the XL probe may overcome some of the challenges posed by obese patients. This probe emits a lower central ultrasound frequency, generating a deeper region of interest. The failure rate of the XL probe was significantly lower than that of the M probe (2 vs. 10%;
p = 0.002), and reliable measurements were obtained in 65% of obese individuals [
47]. A study of patients from France and Hong Kong showed it was possible to obtain valid LSM readings in 91.2% participants using either the M or XL probe [
48•]. However, discordance of ≥ 2 fibrosis stages between histology and LSM occurred in 11% of patients using the XL probe, which was 4- to 5-fold more frequent among patients with severe obesity (BMI ≥ 40 kg/m
2 32 vs. 8%) and liver stiffness > 7.0 kPa (20 vs. 4%) [
49]. It should be noted that LSM values generated by the XL probe were lower per stage of fibrosis, and so, distinct cut-off values are required [
47,
49]. Finally, LSM may predict long-term prognosis. In a study of 556 patients with NAFLD followed for a median of 6.4 years, individuals with higher LSM had significantly worse overall survival and worse survival free from liver-related and extra-hepatic complications [
50•].
Acoustic Radiation Force Impulse (ARFI) Imaging
Acoustic radiation force impulse imaging (ARFI) is a form of elastography that is performed on commercially available B-mode ultrasound machines [
51]. ARFI generates short duration acoustic impulses that excite tissues, and the resulting shear wave velocity through the liver is measured giving a liver stiffness measurement. ARFI has the advantage over TE of giving an assessment of the sonographic appearance of the liver and other abdominal structures, as well as giving an estimate of liver fibrosis. A systematic review of seven studies (723 NAFLD patients) showed that ARFI was reasonably accurate for the detection of significant fibrosis (≥ F2) (AUROC 0.898; summary sensitivity and specificity 80.2 and 85.2%, respectively) [
52]. However, optimal cut-off values were not assessed in this paper [
52]. Much of the work in assessing ARFI as a measure of liver fibrosis has been conducted in patients with viral hepatitis, rather than NAFLD. Therefore, optimum cut-offs for the diagnosis of varying stages of fibrosis in NAFLD need to be validated. There are also different versions of ARFI (such as Siemens Virtual Touch Quantification™ and Phillips ElastPQ™), which may have different diagnostic accuracies and different diagnostic cut-offs. ElastPQ™ gives significantly lower ARFI readings than the Virtual Touch quantification™ [
53]; so, these factors need to be considered when using these techniques.
Another variation of ultrasound elastography is Supersonic Shear Imaging (SSI; Aixplorer, France), which uses an ultrafast ultrasonic scanner [
51]. This technique has shown real promise in the assessment of liver fibrosis and performed better than TE in patients with hepatitis C [
54].
Comparison of Liver Stiffness Measurement Techniques
Only one study compared the diagnostic performance of FibroScan™ M probe, ARFI (Siemens) and SSI in 291 patients with NAFLD using histology as the reference. Overall, SSI performed best for the detection of significant fibrosis, advanced fibrosis and cirrhosis (AUROCs for SSI, FibroScan™ and ARFI were 0.86, 0.82 and 0.77 for diagnoses of ≥ F2; 0.89, 0.86 and 0.84 for ≥ F3; and 0.88, 0.87 and 0.84 for F4; respectively) [
45••]. The results are similar to prior individual studies [
39,
55]. It appears that none of the three imaging methods could accurately predict < F2 fibrosis, so further optimization of ultrasound techniques is needed [
45••]. Failure rates were lower for ARFI (0.7%) than for SSI or FibroScan™ (both
p < 0.0001), whereas unreliable results were higher for ARFI (18.2%) than for SSI or FibroScan™ (
p = 0.0001 and
p = 0.001, respectively) [
45••]. Further trials are needed to confirm the utility of SSI in NAFLD.
Magnetic Resonance Elastography (MRE)
Magnetic resonance elastography (MRE) is a novel method of elastographic assessment which uses a modified phase-contrast pulse sequence to visualize the propagation of a shear-wave deep into liver tissue, evaluating a large portion of the liver [
26]. A recent single-center prospective US study (117 patients) found that MRE very accurately discriminated between F3–4 and F0–2 (AUROC 0.924,
p < 0.0001), but it was less accurate for distinguishing individual fibrosis stages [
56••]. A threshold of ≥ 3.63 kPa demonstrated a NPV and PPV of 97 and 68%, respectively, for a diagnosis of F3–4 [
56••]. The ability of MRE to discriminate between NASH from non-NASH was modest (AUROC 0.73) [
56••]. Recently, a systematic review evaluated nine studies (232 NAFLD patients) and found that the summary AUROCs for ≥ F1, ≥ F2, ≥ F3 and F4 were 0.86, 0.87, 0.90 and 0.91, respectively [
57].
Given its accuracy, MRE also may offer a good non-invasive tool to monitor changes in liver fibrosis. In a placebo-controlled trial of sitagliptin in NAFLD, MRE was shown to have robust correlation coefficient between baseline and 24 weeks [
58]. Longitudinal studies of contemporaneous MRE and liver biopsy are underway, and their results are eagerly awaited.
Comparison of Magnetic Resonance Elastography with Ultrasound-Based Elastography
Two recent cross-sectional studies have compared the effectiveness of MRE vs. TE for the diagnosis of liver fibrosis in patients with NAFLD [
35••,
36••]. The first study, from Japan, assessed 142 patients and demonstrated that MRE was superior to TE for the diagnosis of ≥ F2 (AUROCs 0.91 vs. 0.82, respectively;
p = 0.001) and F4 (AUROCs 0.97 vs. 0.92;
p = 0.049) [
35••]. A similar US-based study in 104 patients showed similar findings in a more obese cohort [
36••]. In that study, the M or XL probe for TE was used where indicated, whereas the Japanese study used the M probe only. Overall, MRE had an AUROC of 0.82 for a diagnosis of any fibrosis (F1–4), which was superior to TE (AUROC 0.67). Using a threshold of 2.65 kPa, MRE had a sensitivity of 76.5%, specificity of 79.1%, PPV of 81.3% and NPV of 73.9% for a diagnosis of any fibrosis [
36••]. MRE was also more effective than TE in diagnosing NASH (AUROC 0.70 vs. 0.35;
p = 0.001) [
35••,
36••].
Overall, MRE and TE both perform well for a diagnosis of advanced fibrosis and cirrhosis, with MRE being slightly superior. However, MRE outperforms TE for a diagnosis of earlier stages of fibrosis. MRE does not appear to be affected by obesity and ascites, but inflammation and liver iron overload may cause inaccuracies in MRE readings. The major limitation of MRE, when compared with TE, is its cost, and as a result, it is not likely to be widely used for the staging of NAFLD in the community. However, when compared with liver biopsy, the cost of MRE is much more acceptable, and as a result, specialist centers that have the technology available could choose MRE as a second-line investigation for the staging of NAFLD in those where they are considering a liver biopsy. It is also likely that MRE combined with PDFF will continue to be used in clinical trials to monitor response to treatment.