Fig 1.
Flow diagram of the study population.
2D SWE, 2D shear wave elastography; UGAP, ultrasound-guided attenuation parameter; VCTE, vibration-controlled transient elastography; CAP, controlled attenuation parameter; LB, liver biopsy.
Table 1.
Baseline characteristics of control participants and patients with NAFLD.
Table 2.
Diagnostic accuracy of 2D SWE and VCTE for the diagnosis of fibrosis stage.
Table 3.
Diagnostic accuracy of UGAP and CAP for the diagnosis of steatosis grade.
Fig 2.
Patient distribution according to histopathologic evaluation, LSM, and AC.
Fibrosis stage (a), steatosis grade (b), inflammation grade (c), and ballooning grade (d). LSM, liver stiffness measurement; AC, attenuation coefficient.
Fig 3.
NASH or progressive NASH patient distribution according to LSM and AC.
a, c: All patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease were divided into four groups, according to the cutoff values of LSM and AC for fibrosis stage ≥ F1 and steatosis grade ≥ S1 [NASH (a), progressive NASH (c)]. b, d: Percentage of NASH (b) or progressive NASH (d) patients in each group. Percentages of NASH patients in Groups A, B, C, and D were 0.0% (0/14), 36.5% (19/52), 67.97% (19/28), and 78.7% (85/108), respectively; there was a significant difference in the distribution among groups (P < 0.001) (b). Percentages of progressive NASH patients in Groups A, B, C, and D were 0.0% (0/14), 7.7% (4/52), 35.7% (10/28), and 50.0% (54/108), respectively; there was a significant difference in the distribution among groups (P < 0.001) (d). LSM, liver stiffness measurement; AC, attenuation coefficient.
Table 4.
Predictive factors for progressive NASH, as assessed using univariate and multivariate regression models.