Key result
Ultrasound-guided attenuation parameter (UGAP) showed a strong correlation with controlled attenuation parameter (CAP) (r = 0.947), enabling reliable estimation of CAP using a simple regression formula.
Why the study?
To develop a regression model for estimating controlled attenuation parameter (CAP) from ultrasound-guided attenuation parameter (UGAP)-attenuation coefficient and evaluate their agreement and interchangeability in a clinical setting.
Does ultrasound-guided attenuation parameter (UGAP) reliably estimate controlled attenuation parameter (CAP) in patients with suspected hepatic steatosis?
Cross-Sectional (n=85)
No
Does ultrasound-guided attenuation parameter (UGAP) reliably estimate controlled attenuation parameter (CAP) in patients with suspected hepatic steatosis?
Effect estimate: r = 0.947 (95% CI 0.919-0.965)
p-value: p=<0.0001
UGAP can reliably estimate CAP using a simple regression formula, supporting their interchangeable use for hepatic steatosis assessment in routine clinical practice.
Purpose To develop a regression model for estimating the controlled attenuation parameter (CAP) from ultrasound-guided attenuation parameter (UGAP)-attenuation coefficient (AC) and to evaluate the agreement and interchangeability between the two measurements in a clinical setting. Methods This retrospective observational study included 85 patients who underwent both UGAP and CAP measurements. UGAP-AC values were converted to dB/m to match CAP units. Pearson’s correlation and linear regression analyses were performed to derive a prediction formula. Bland–Altman analysis and repeated-measures analysis of variance were used to assess fixed and proportional biases and the influence of body mass index (BMI). Results UGAP-AC and CAP showed a strong correlation ( r = 0.947, p < 0.0001). The regression equation was: CAP (dB/m) = 371.5 × UGAP-AC (dB/cm/MHz) + 12.3 ( R 2 = 0.8946). Bland–Altman analysis revealed a fixed bias of 28.6 dB/m and a BMI-dependent proportional bias. However, no significant proportional bias was observed within the clinically relevant CAP range (228–300 dB/m). Conclusion UGAP-AC can reliably estimate CAP using a simple regression formula. Although systematic biases exist, their clinical impact appears limited, supporting the interchangeable use of UGAP and CAP in routine practice.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Daisuke Miura (2025) conducted a cross-sectional in Hepatic steatosis (n=85). Ultrasound-guided attenuation parameter (UGAP) vs. Controlled attenuation parameter (CAP) was evaluated on Correlation between UGAP-AC and CAP (r = 0.947, 95% CI 0.919-0.965, p=<0.0001). Ultrasound-guided attenuation parameter (UGAP) showed a strong correlation with controlled attenuation parameter (CAP) (r = 0.947), enabling reliable estimation of CAP using a simple regression formula.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: