A prospective comparison of two ultrasound attenuation imaging modes using different frequencies for assessing hepatic steatosis

Le résumé fourni par la source

PURPOSE: This study compared the diagnostic performance of two attenuation imaging (ATI) modes-low-frequency (3 MHz) and high-frequency (4 MHz)-for assessing hepatic steatosis, with histopathological hepatic fat fraction (HFF) as the reference standard. METHODS: This prospective single-center study enrolled participants with suspected metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) scheduled for liver biopsy or surgery between June 2023 and June 2024. Attenuation coefficient (AC) values were consecutively measured using low- and high-frequency ATI modes, while the skin-to-region of interest distance (SRD) was measured simultaneously. Spearman correlation analysis evaluated the relationships of AC with HFF and SRD, and linear regression identified factors affecting AC. Diagnostic performance was evaluated using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). RESULTS: In total, 119 participants (mean age, 37.2±12.0 years; 87 men) were included, with 73 (61.3%) diagnosed with MASLD. HFF ranged from 0% to 50%. The AC values in the lowfrequency mode were significantly higher than those in the high-frequency mode (0.61 vs. 0.54 dB/cm/MHz, P<0.001). HFF significantly influenced AC in both modes, whereas SRD affected AC only in the high-frequency mode (P<0.001). AC correlated positively with HFF in both modes (rs≥0.514, P<0.001) and negatively with SRD in the high-frequency mode (rs=-0.338, P<0.001). The AUROC for hepatic steatosis did not differ significantly between the two modes (0.751 vs. 0.771, P=0.609). CONCLUSION: The low-frequency mode produced higher AC values than the high-frequency mode and demonstrated comparable diagnostic accuracy for assessing hepatic steatosis. Unlike the high-frequency mode, the low-frequency mode was not influenced by SRD.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.