Fig 1.
Flow chart of the study participants.
VCTE, vibration-controlled transient elastography; ATT, attenuation coefficient; CAP, controlled attenuation parameter.
Fig 2.
Diagnosis of fatty liver using attenuation in the B mode.
Multiple ultrasound waves with different frequency components are used when measuring in the B mode. Fat volume estimation is performed according to the difference in the degree of attenuation of the received signal. Measurement is performed while observing the relevant part in real time.
Table 1.
Patient characteristics.
Fig 3.
ATT and CAP values for each grade of steatosis.
Graph shows the ATT value (A), CAP M-probe value (B) and CAP XL-probe value (C) for each steatosis grade. Vertical axis is a logarithmic scale. Tops and bottoms of the boxes = 1st and 3rd quartiles. Length of the box represents the interquartile range, within which 50% of values are located. In pairwise comparisons, the ATT value and CAP M or XL-probe value for each steatosis grade differed significantly from each other (S0 vs. S1, P<0.05; S0 vs. S2, P<0.001).ATT, attenuation coefficient; CAP, controlled attenuation parameter.
Fig 4.
Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves for predicting steatosis.
ROC curves for diagnosis of mild steatosis (A; S ≥ 1), significant steatosis (B; S ≥ 2), and severe steatosis (C; S = 3). No significant differences in AUC-ROC were found between ATT and CAP examined using the DeLong test. ATT, attenuation coefficient; CAP, controlled attenuation parameter.
Table 2.
Results of comparisons between ATT and CAP.
Fig 5.
Correlation between ATT and CAP.
ATT measurements were significantly correlated with CAP M-probe measurements (r = 0.549, P<0.0001) and CAP XL-probe measurements (r = 0.526, P<0.0001). ATT, attenuation coefficient; CAP, controlled attenuation parameter.
Fig 6.
Measurement times for CAP and ATT.
A) Measurement time is significantly shorter for ATT than for CAP M-probe (P<0.0001). Measurement times for CAP M-probe (B) and ATT (C), grouped by subcutaneous fat thickness, showing a significantly increased CAP M-probe measurement time when the subcutaneous fat thickness is >2 cm (P = 0.0085), with no effect of subcutaneous fat thickness on ATT measurements (P = 0.9713).
Fig 7.
Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves by liver etiology.
A) ROC curves for hepatitis C virus (HCV)-positive patients and hepatitis B virus (HBV)-positive patients. B) ROC curves for alcoholic liver disease patients. C) ROC curves for nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) patients and nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) patients. D) ROC curves for other liver disease patients. The AUC-ROC results for each background liver disease varied.