Attenuation parameter and liver stiffness measurement using FibroTouch vs Fibroscan in patients with chronic liver disease
Background & aim We studied FibroTouch (FT) and Fibroscan (FS) examination results and their repeatability when performed by healthcare personnel of different background. Methods FT and FS examinations were performed on patients with chronic liver disease by two operators, a doctor and a nurse,...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Published: |
Public Library of Science
2021
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://eprints.um.edu.my/28217/ |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | Background & aim We studied FibroTouch (FT) and Fibroscan (FS) examination results and their repeatability when performed by healthcare personnel of different background. Methods FT and FS examinations were performed on patients with chronic liver disease by two operators, a doctor and a nurse, twice on each patient, at two different time points, independent of each other. Results The data for 163 patients with 1304 examinations was analyzed. There was strong correlation between FT and FS for attenuation parameter (Spearman's rho 0.76, p<0.001) and liver stiffness measurement (LSM) (Spearman's rho 0.70, p<0.001). However, FT produced higher value at lower attenuation parameter and LSM, and lower value at higher attenuation parameter and LSM. There was substantial agreement when using 15kPa LSM cut-off, but only moderate agreement when using 10kPa and 20kPa LSM cut-offs and 248dB/m, 268dB/m and 280dB/m attenuation parameter cut-offs. The IQR for attenuation parameter and IQR/median for LSM were significantly lower for FT compared with FS (4dB/m vs 27dB/m, p<0.001, and 10 vs 12, p<0.001, respectively). The intra- and inter-observer reliability of attenuation parameter and LSM using FT and FS were good to excellent with intraclass correlation coefficients 0.89-0.99. FT had shorter examination time (33s vs 47s, p<0.001) and less invalid measurements (0 vs 2, p<0.001). Conclusion Measurements obtained with FT and FS strongly correlated, but significant differences in their absolute values, consistency, examination time and number of invalid measurements were observed. Either device can be used by healthcare personnel of different backgrounds when sufficiently trained. |
|---|