Why the study?
Further evidence was needed on the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound-guided attenuation parameter (UGAP) for detecting hepatic steatosis in patients with impaired glucose tolerance against MRI-PDFF.
Does ultrasound-guided attenuation parameter (UGAP) accurately diagnose hepatic steatosis compared to MRI-PDFF in patients with impaired glucose tolerance?
Does ultrasound-guided attenuation parameter (UGAP) accurately diagnose hepatic steatosis compared to MRI-PDFF in patients with impaired glucose tolerance?
UGAP provides a highly accurate, non-invasive method for quantifying hepatic steatosis in patients with impaired glucose tolerance, performing comparably to the MRI-PDFF reference standard.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
May support UGAP for steatosis assessment in impaired glucose tolerance; hypothesis-generating pending larger validation.
OBJECTIVES: Our objective was to provide further evidence regarding the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound-guided attenuation parameter (UGAP) for detecting hepatic steatosis in a selected and homogeneous cohort of patients with impaired glucose tolerance using magnetic resonance imaging-proton density fat fraction (MRI-PDFF) as the standard reference method. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From October 2023 to March 2024, individuals with impaired glucose tolerance and suspected metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) who underwent abdominal ultrasound and MRI-PDFF were enrolled in this prospective study. Multivariable linear regression was performed to assess independent factors associated with UGAP. The correlation between UGAP, and MRI-PDFF was evaluated using the Pearson correlation coefficient. The diagnostic performance of the UGAP for hepatic steatosis was assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). RESULTS: A total of 193 participants (median age, 35 years; IQR, 25-48 years; 98 male) were evaluated, including 90 participants (47%) with MASLD. Body mass index (BMI), waist circumference, and skin-liver capsule distance were independently associated with UGAP. UGAP was strongly and positively correlated with MRI-PDFF (r = 0.890, p < 0.001). The AUCs of UGAP for diagnosing hepatic steatosis ≥ S1 (MRI-PDFF ≥ 6.4%), ≥ S2 (MRI-PDFF ≥ 17.4%), and ≥ S3 (MRI-PDFF ≥ 22.1%) were 0.980 (95% CI: 0.957-1.000), 0.955 (95% CI: 0.912-0.999), and 0.985 (95% CI: 0.970-1.000), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: UGAP could accurately diagnose hepatic steatosis and estimate the hepatic fat fraction. CRITICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: UGAP has high diagnostic performance for hepatic steatosis. UGAP offers a method of quantifying liver fat content similar to MRI-PDFF, which is anticipated to be beneficial in the long-term monitoring of patients with impaired glucose tolerance. KEY POINTS: Hepatic steatosis is an early factor that causes liver damage in MASLD. UGAP has an accurate diagnostic performance for hepatic steatosis. UGAP was positively correlated with MRI- proton density fat fraction. Some clinical parameters may affect UGAP measurement.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gao et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: