Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Fig 1.

Flow diagram of the study population.

Abbreviations: NAFLD, nonalcoholic fatty liver disease.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Table 1.

Baseline characteristics of study population.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Table 2.

Reliability of TE, SSI, and ARFI.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Table 3.

Factors affecting the liver stiffness measurement unreliability or failure.

More »

Table 3 Expand

Fig 2.

Scattered diagram showing the correlation of shear-wave velocity (m/s) between ARFI and SSI.

Abbreviations: ARFI, acoustic radiation force impulse imaging; SSI, supersonic shear imaging.

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Table 4.

Diagnostic performance of TE, SSI, and ARFI for staging liver fibrosis.

More »

Table 4 Expand

Fig 3.

Comparative AUROCs of ARFI (m/s), TE (kPa), and SSI (kPa, m/s) for the diagnosis of each fibrosis stage.

A, for significant fibrosis. B, for advanced fibrosis. C, for cirrhosis. Abbreviations: AUROC, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve; ARFI, acoustic radiation force impulse imaging; TE, transient elastography; SSI, supersonic shear imaging.

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Table 5.

Pairwise comparison of diagnostic performance for staging fibrosis among TE, SSI, and ARFI.

More »

Table 5 Expand

Table 6.

Comparison of liver elasticity as measured by TE, SSI, and ARFI according to fibrosis stage.

More »

Table 6 Expand

Table 7.

Factors influencing liver stiffness measurement.

More »

Table 7 Expand