Assessing significant fibrosis using imaging-based elastography in chronic hepatitis B patients: Pilot study.

BACKGROUND Accurate detection of significant fibrosis (fibrosis stage 2 or higher on the METAVIR scale) is important especially for chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients with high viral loads but with normal or mildly elevated alanine aminotransferase (ALT) levels because the presence of significant fibrosis is accepted as the indication for antiviral treatment. Liver biopsy is the reference standard for diagnosing significant fibrosis, but it is an invasive procedure. Consequently, noninvasive imaging-based measurements, such as magnetic resonance elastography (MRE) or two-dimensional shear-wave elastography (2D-SWE), have been proposed for the quantitative assessment of liver fibrosis. AIM To explore MRE and 2D-SWE to identify fibrosis stage, and to compare their performance with that of serum-based indices. METHODS The study enrolled 63 treatment-naive CHB patients with high viral loads but with normal or mildly elevated ALT levels who underwent liver biopsy before a decision was made to initiate antiviral therapy. MRE and 2D-SWE were performed, and serum-based indices, such as FIB-4 and aspartate transaminase to platelet ratio index (APRI), were calculated. The diagnostic performances of MRE, 2D-SWE, FIB-4, and APRI for assessing significant fibrosis (>= F2) and cirrhosis (F4) were evaluated with liver histology as the reference standard, using receiver operating characteristic analyses. RESULTS The liver fibrosis stage was F0/F1 in 19, F2 in 14, F3 in 14, and F4 in 16 patients, respectively. MRE significantly discriminated F2 from F0/1 (P = 0.022), whereas 2D-SWE showed a broad overlap in distinguishing those stages. MRE showed a higher correlation coefficient value with fibrosis stage than 2D-SWE with fibrosis stage (0.869 vs 0.649, Spearman test; P < 0.001). Multivariate linear regression analyses showed that fibrosis stage was the only factor affecting the values of MRE (P < 0.001), whereas body mass index (P = 0.042) and fibrosis stage (P < 0.001) were independent factors affecting 2D-SWE values. MRE performance for diagnosing significant fibrosis was better [area under the curve (AUC) = 0.906, positive predictive value (PPV) 97.3%, negative predictive value (NPV) 69.2%] than that of FIB-4 (AUC = 0.697, P = 0.002) and APRI (AUC = 0.717, P = 0.010), whereas the performance of 2D-SWE (AUC = 0.843, PPV 86%, NPV 65%) was not significantly different from that of FIB-4 or APRI. CONCLUSION Compared to SWE, MRE might be more precise non-invasive assessment for depicting significant fibrosis and for making-decision to initiate antiviral-therapy in treatment-naive CHB patients with normal or mildly-elevated ALT levels.