Diagnostic Performance of Magnetic Resonance Elastography Versus Vibration‐Controlled Transient Elastography for Liver Fibrosis Staging in Steatotic Liver Disease

ABSTRACT Gravitational magnetic resonance elastography (GT‐MRE) enables comprehensive biomechanical liver characterization and may overcome limitations of conventional elastography techniques. This study evaluated the diagnostic performance of two‐ and three‐dimensional (2D and 3D) GT‐MRE compared with 2D acoustic MRE (AC‐MRE) and vibration‐controlled transient elastography (VCTE) for liver fibrosis staging. In this prospective study, patients with suspected or known steatotic liver disease underwent GT‐MRE (2D and 3D, gradient‐echo sequences) and AC‐MRE (2D, spin‐echo echo‐planar imaging) at 1.5 T, plus VCTE with a median interval to MRE of 37 days (IQR, 20–124 days; range, 0–372 days). Statistical analyses included generalized additive models, ordinal logistic regression, and decision tree‐based classification. Diagnostic performance was assessed using cumulative receiver operating characteristic analysis and corresponding areas under the curve (AUCs). Ninety‐one participants (median age, 55 years [IQR, 45–64]; 41 women) were included, of whom 35 (38%) had histopathological correlation. In the biopsy‐confirmed subgroup, 3D GT‐MRE‐derived viscoelastic parameters showed promising exploratory performance for early fibrosis classification. Wave attenuation achieved AUCs of 0.91 for F0 versus ≥ F1 and 0.99 for ≤ F1 versus ≥ F2, while phase angle yielded an AUC of 0.88 for F0 versus ≥ F1, with numerically higher AUCs than conventional stiffness‐based metrics. For advanced fibrosis thresholds, all modalities performed well (AUC ≥ 0.84). Obuchowski measures for 3D‐derived parameters were 0.95–0.96. Internally cross‐validated multiparametric modeling achieved an accuracy of up to 92%. VCTE measurements plateaued beyond F3, whereas AC‐ and GT‐MRE metrics continued to increase with fibrosis severity. 3D GT‐MRE‐derived viscoelastic parameters showed promising performance for liver fibrosis classification and provided biomechanical information complementary to conventional stiffness measurements. Given the limited biopsy‐confirmed sample and marked class imbalance at F0, these findings require validation in larger independent cohorts before clinical implementation.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
NMR in Biomedicine
Published
2026-11-03
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/nbm.70429
Primary Topic
Ultrasound Imaging and Elastography
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Diagnostic Performance of Magnetic Resonance Elastography Versus Vibration‐Controlled Transient Elastography for Liver Fibrosis Staging in Steatotic Liver Disease

Scherwin Mahmoudi, Lisa Reisbeck, Iulia Dahmer, Christian Booz et al.
NMR in Biomedicine
Ultrasound Imaging and Elastography
article

Diagnostic Performance of Magnetic Resonance Elastography Versus Vibration‐Controlled Transient Elastography for Liver Fibrosis Staging in Steatotic Liver Disease

Scherwin Mahmoudi, Lisa Reisbeck, Iulia Dahmer, Christian Booz, Tommaso D’Angelo, Katerina Torgashov, Vitali Koch, Anita Pathil‐Warth, Thomas Joseph Vogl, Christof Matthias Sommer, Stefan Zeuzem, Sandra Ciesek, Leon David Gruenewald, Renate Hammerstingl, Esra Görgülü, Jennifer Gotta, Eva Maria Herrmann, Ralph Sinkus, Nicole Suarez Ziegengeist, Katharina Schregel, Katrin Eichler, Melis Onay, Philipp Reschke, Raja Idris, Sebastian M Haberkorn, Maria Johanna Gobertina Tetuanui Vehreschild, Laura Hempfling
article en

Abstract

ABSTRACT Gravitational magnetic resonance elastography (GT‐MRE) enables comprehensive biomechanical liver characterization and may overcome limitations of conventional elastography techniques. This study evaluated the diagnostic performance of two‐ and three‐dimensional (2D and 3D) GT‐MRE compared with 2D acoustic MRE (AC‐MRE) and vibration‐controlled transient elastography (VCTE) for liver fibrosis staging. In this prospective study, patients with suspected or known steatotic liver disease underwent GT‐MRE (2D and 3D, gradient‐echo sequences) and AC‐MRE (2D, spin‐echo echo‐planar imaging) at 1.5 T, plus VCTE with a median interval to MRE of 37 days (IQR, 20–124 days; range, 0–372 days). Statistical analyses included generalized additive models, ordinal logistic regression, and decision tree‐based classification. Diagnostic performance was assessed using cumulative receiver operating characteristic analysis and corresponding areas under the curve (AUCs). Ninety‐one participants (median age, 55 years [IQR, 45–64]; 41 women) were included, of whom 35 (38%) had histopathological correlation. In the biopsy‐confirmed subgroup, 3D GT‐MRE‐derived viscoelastic parameters showed promising exploratory performance for early fibrosis classification. Wave attenuation achieved AUCs of 0.91 for F0 versus ≥ F1 and 0.99 for ≤ F1 versus ≥ F2, while phase angle yielded an AUC of 0.88 for F0 versus ≥ F1, with numerically higher AUCs than conventional stiffness‐based metrics. For advanced fibrosis thresholds, all modalities performed well (AUC ≥ 0.84). Obuchowski measures for 3D‐derived parameters were 0.95–0.96. Internally cross‐validated multiparametric modeling achieved an accuracy of up to 92%. VCTE measurements plateaued beyond F3, whereas AC‐ and GT‐MRE metrics continued to increase with fibrosis severity. 3D GT‐MRE‐derived viscoelastic parameters showed promising performance for liver fibrosis classification and provided biomechanical information complementary to conventional stiffness measurements. Given the limited biopsy‐confirmed sample and marked class imbalance at F0, these findings require validation in larger independent cohorts before clinical implementation.

NMR in BiomedicineVol. 39(12)
Goethe University Frankfurt (DE), Inserm (FR), King's College London (GB), Centre de Recherche sur l'Inflammation (FR), University Hospital Frankfurt (DE), Jena University Hospital (DE)
Openalex Percentile: Top 14%
Ultrasound Imaging and Elastography
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Laika access coming soon