Magnetic Resonance Elastography For noninvasive Detection of Liver Fibrosis: is There an Added Value of 3D Acquisition?

Purpose: (1) Assess the diagnostic performance of liver 3D magnetic resonance elastography (MRE) parameters (including stiffness, storage/loss modulus and damping ratio) compared to liver stiffness measured with 2D MRE for noninvasive detection of advanced liver fibrosis (F3-F4) and cirrhosis (F4) in patients with chronic liver disease. (2) Assess the value of serum markers (FIB-4) in detecting advanced liver fibrosis and cirrhosis in the same patients.

Methods: This was a single center, prospective IRB-approved cross-sectional study that included 49 patients (M/F: 23/26, mean age 50.8 y) with chronic liver disease and concomitant liver biopsy. MRE was acquired at 1.5T using a spin echo-EPI sequence. The following parameters were measured: liver stiffness using 2D MRE (LS-2D) and 3D MRE parameters (LS-3D, liver storage, loss modulus and damping ratio). The Mann-Whitney U test, ROC curve analysis, Spearman correlation and logistic regression were performed to evaluate diagnostic performance of MRE parameters and FIB-4.

Results: LS-2D and LS-3D had similar diagnostic performance for diagnosis of F3-F4, with AUCs of 0.87 and 0.88, sensitivity of 0.71 and 0.81, specificity of 0.89 for both. For diagnosis of F4, LS-2D and LS-3D had similar performance with AUCs of 0.81 for both, sensitivity of 0.75 and 0.83, and specificity of 0.84 and 0.73, respectively. Additional 3D parameters (storage modulus, loss modulus, damping ratio) had variable performance, with AUC range of 0.59-0.78 for F3-F4; and 0.52-0.70 for F4. FIB-4 had lower diagnostic performance, with AUCs of 0.66 for F3-F4, and 0.68 for F4.

Conclusion: Our study shows no added value of 3D MRE compared to 2D MRE for detection of advanced fibrosis and cirrhosis, while FIB-4 had lower diagnostic performance.