{"title":"慢性心力衰竭和活体弥漫性病变患者的肝脏超声弹性测量诊断范围","authors":"A. V. Borsukov, D. Shestakova, A. I. Skutar'","doi":"10.33667/2078-5631-2024-6-51-57","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective. Study and comparison of the diagnostic performance of various ultrasound elastometry methods in detecting liver fibrosis in patients with heart failure.Materials and methods. The study was conducted from June 2022 to January 2024. 57 patients with heart failure and metabolic syndrome were examined, divided into three groups depending on the stage of the disease: stage I (n = 21), stage II (n = 24), stage III (n = 11), each of which was divided into subgroups depending on the severity of liver fibrosis (F0–F4). Standard parameters of sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were used to compare the performance of transient elastometry, vibration-controlled transient elastometry, point elastometry, and two-dimensional shear wave elastometry. A complex of multislice computed tomography with color assessment of the liver structure, a biochemical blood test with the de Ritis coefficient and the FIB‑4 scale were used as a reference method.Results. In stage I heart failure, all four methods showed similar sensitivity, specificity and accuracy. At stage II, using transient elastometry, sensitivity was 59.4%, specificity — 68.2%, accuracy — 62.4%; visual transient elastometry — 72.8%, 87.2%, 79.4%, respectively; point elastometry — 68.6%, 83.7%, 77.4%, respectively; two-dimensional shear wave elastometry — 89.6%, 94.3%, 91.6%. At stage III, transient elastometry turned out to be uninformative; visual transient elastometry showed a sensitivity of 61.2%, specificity of 70.4%, accuracy of 64.6%; point elastometry — 48.6%, 60.1%, 52.3%, respectively; while two-dimensional shear wave elastometry showed a sensitivity of 85.6%, specificity of 92.5%, accuracy of 88.8%.Conclusions. For patients with stage I heart failure, the choice of a specific elastometry method is not of fundamental importance, since the indicators do not differ. However, in stages II and III, shear wave elastometry is the preferred method, especially in stage III, where it demonstrates higher diagnostic performance compared to point elastometry. Visual transient elastometry can be used additionally with the method of two-dimensional shear wave elastometry or in the case where two-dimensional shear wave elastometry is not possible. ","PeriodicalId":18337,"journal":{"name":"Medical alphabet","volume":" 11","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The range of diagnostic possibilities of ultrasound liver elastometry in patients with chronic heart failure and diffuse changes in the live\",\"authors\":\"A. V. Borsukov, D. Shestakova, A. I. Skutar'\",\"doi\":\"10.33667/2078-5631-2024-6-51-57\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objective. Study and comparison of the diagnostic performance of various ultrasound elastometry methods in detecting liver fibrosis in patients with heart failure.Materials and methods. The study was conducted from June 2022 to January 2024. 57 patients with heart failure and metabolic syndrome were examined, divided into three groups depending on the stage of the disease: stage I (n = 21), stage II (n = 24), stage III (n = 11), each of which was divided into subgroups depending on the severity of liver fibrosis (F0–F4). Standard parameters of sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were used to compare the performance of transient elastometry, vibration-controlled transient elastometry, point elastometry, and two-dimensional shear wave elastometry. A complex of multislice computed tomography with color assessment of the liver structure, a biochemical blood test with the de Ritis coefficient and the FIB‑4 scale were used as a reference method.Results. In stage I heart failure, all four methods showed similar sensitivity, specificity and accuracy. At stage II, using transient elastometry, sensitivity was 59.4%, specificity — 68.2%, accuracy — 62.4%; visual transient elastometry — 72.8%, 87.2%, 79.4%, respectively; point elastometry — 68.6%, 83.7%, 77.4%, respectively; two-dimensional shear wave elastometry — 89.6%, 94.3%, 91.6%. At stage III, transient elastometry turned out to be uninformative; visual transient elastometry showed a sensitivity of 61.2%, specificity of 70.4%, accuracy of 64.6%; point elastometry — 48.6%, 60.1%, 52.3%, respectively; while two-dimensional shear wave elastometry showed a sensitivity of 85.6%, specificity of 92.5%, accuracy of 88.8%.Conclusions. For patients with stage I heart failure, the choice of a specific elastometry method is not of fundamental importance, since the indicators do not differ. However, in stages II and III, shear wave elastometry is the preferred method, especially in stage III, where it demonstrates higher diagnostic performance compared to point elastometry. Visual transient elastometry can be used additionally with the method of two-dimensional shear wave elastometry or in the case where two-dimensional shear wave elastometry is not possible. \",\"PeriodicalId\":18337,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medical alphabet\",\"volume\":\" 11\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medical alphabet\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.33667/2078-5631-2024-6-51-57\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical alphabet","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33667/2078-5631-2024-6-51-57","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的研究和比较各种超声弹性测量方法在检测心力衰竭患者肝纤维化方面的诊断性能。研究于 2022 年 6 月至 2024 年 1 月进行。57名心力衰竭合并代谢综合征患者接受了检查,根据疾病的分期分为三组:I期(21人)、II期(24人)、III期(11人),每组又根据肝纤维化的严重程度分为若干亚组(F0-F4)。采用敏感性、特异性和准确性等标准参数来比较瞬态弹性测量法、振动控制瞬态弹性测量法、点弹性测量法和二维剪切波弹性测量法的性能。多层计算机断层扫描与肝脏结构彩色评估、生化血液检测与德里蒂斯系数和 FIB-4 量表的复合方法被用作参考方法。在心力衰竭 I 期,这四种方法的灵敏度、特异性和准确性相似。在 II 期,使用瞬时弹性测量法,敏感性为 59.4%,特异性为 68.2%,准确性为 62.4%;视觉瞬时弹性测量法分别为 72.8%、87.2% 和 79.4%;点弹性测量法分别为 68.6%、83.7% 和 77.4%;二维剪切波弹性测量法分别为 89.6%、94.3% 和 91.6%。在Ⅲ期,瞬时弹性测量的信息量不大;视觉瞬时弹性测量的敏感性为61.2%,特异性为70.4%,准确性为64.6%;点弹性测量的敏感性为48.6%,特异性为60.1%,准确性为52.3%;而二维剪切波弹性测量的敏感性为85.6%,特异性为92.5%,准确性为88.8%。对于 I 期心衰患者,选择特定的弹性测量方法并不重要,因为各项指标并无差异。然而,在第二和第三阶段,剪切波弹性测量法是首选方法,尤其是在第三阶段,与点式弹性测量法相比,剪切波弹性测量法具有更高的诊断性能。视觉瞬态弹性测量法可与二维剪切波弹性测量法结合使用,或在无法使用二维剪切波弹性测量法的情况下使用。
The range of diagnostic possibilities of ultrasound liver elastometry in patients with chronic heart failure and diffuse changes in the live
Objective. Study and comparison of the diagnostic performance of various ultrasound elastometry methods in detecting liver fibrosis in patients with heart failure.Materials and methods. The study was conducted from June 2022 to January 2024. 57 patients with heart failure and metabolic syndrome were examined, divided into three groups depending on the stage of the disease: stage I (n = 21), stage II (n = 24), stage III (n = 11), each of which was divided into subgroups depending on the severity of liver fibrosis (F0–F4). Standard parameters of sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were used to compare the performance of transient elastometry, vibration-controlled transient elastometry, point elastometry, and two-dimensional shear wave elastometry. A complex of multislice computed tomography with color assessment of the liver structure, a biochemical blood test with the de Ritis coefficient and the FIB‑4 scale were used as a reference method.Results. In stage I heart failure, all four methods showed similar sensitivity, specificity and accuracy. At stage II, using transient elastometry, sensitivity was 59.4%, specificity — 68.2%, accuracy — 62.4%; visual transient elastometry — 72.8%, 87.2%, 79.4%, respectively; point elastometry — 68.6%, 83.7%, 77.4%, respectively; two-dimensional shear wave elastometry — 89.6%, 94.3%, 91.6%. At stage III, transient elastometry turned out to be uninformative; visual transient elastometry showed a sensitivity of 61.2%, specificity of 70.4%, accuracy of 64.6%; point elastometry — 48.6%, 60.1%, 52.3%, respectively; while two-dimensional shear wave elastometry showed a sensitivity of 85.6%, specificity of 92.5%, accuracy of 88.8%.Conclusions. For patients with stage I heart failure, the choice of a specific elastometry method is not of fundamental importance, since the indicators do not differ. However, in stages II and III, shear wave elastometry is the preferred method, especially in stage III, where it demonstrates higher diagnostic performance compared to point elastometry. Visual transient elastometry can be used additionally with the method of two-dimensional shear wave elastometry or in the case where two-dimensional shear wave elastometry is not possible.