Tissue attenuation imaging values were significantly lower in MASLD patients with FIB-4 ≥1.3 compared to those with FIB-4 <1.3 (median 0.74 vs 0.79), showing a weak inverse correlation (r=-0.188).
Observational (n=196)
No
Does quantitative ultrasound-derived liver fat measurement correlate with FIB-4-based fibrosis risk in patients with MASLD?
Quantitative ultrasound-derived liver fat parameters show only weak associations with FIB-4-based fibrosis risk, indicating limited utility for fibrosis risk stratification in MASLD.
Tasa de eventos absoluta: 0.74% vs 0.79%
valor p: p=0.002
Aims: Metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) is the most common chronic liver disease worldwide. While hepatic steatosis defines the disease, liver fibrosis is the main determinant of prognosis. The fibrosis-4 (FIB-4) score is widely used as a first-line noninvasive tool for fibrosis risk stratification, with a threshold of 1.3 recommended in clinical practice. Quantitative ultrasound techniques, including tissue attenuation imaging (TAI) and tissue scatter imaging (TSI), enable objective assessment of hepatic fat content. This study aimed to investigate the relationship between FIB-4 score and quantitative ultrasound-derived liver fat parameters in patients with MASLD.Methods: This retrospective, single-center study included 196 patients diagnosed with MASLD who underwent quantitative ultrasound liver fat assessment between January 2021 and April 2023. TAI and TSI measurements were obtained under standardized breath-hold conditions with a 1-7 MHz convex transducer. FIB-4 scores were calculated using routine laboratory parameters, and patients were categorized as FIB-4
Kılıç et al. (Fri,) conducted a observational in Metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) (n=196). FIB-4 ≥1.3 vs. FIB-4 <1.3 was evaluated on Tissue attenuation imaging (TAI) value (p=0.002). Tissue attenuation imaging values were significantly lower in MASLD patients with FIB-4 ≥1.3 compared to those with FIB-4 <1.3 (median 0.74 vs 0.79), showing a weak inverse correlation (r=-0.188).