Abstract
This study was aimed at determining whether liver stiffness measurements by 2-D shear wave elastography using GE's (2D-SWE-GE) and Canon's (2D-SWE-Canon) newest apparatus and vibration-controlled transient elastography (VCTE) share the same distribution of values compared with Hologic Supersonic Imagine (2D-SWE-SSI). In participants with chronic liver disease recruited in two university centers from August 2020 to February 2021, liver stiffness was measured the same day by the same operator with 2D-SWE-SSI plus one of the following devices: 2D-SWE-GE (n = 314), 2D-SWE-Canon (n = 311), and VCTE-M probe (n = 812). VCTE-M and 2D-SWE-SSI values shared the highest correlation and concordance coefficients (0.933 and 0.920, respectively) and a coefficient of variation below 20%, whatever the range of values. 2D-SWE-GE had the lowest variations, with 2D-SWE-SSI values below 13 kPa. However, both 2D-SWE-GE and 2D-SWE-Canon exhibited a frank underestimation of the high percentiles’ 2D-SWE-SSI values with coefficients of variation of –21.7% and –25.8% from 13- to 17-kPa values, and –44.3% and –32.4% from 17-kPa values, respectively. In conclusion, knowledge of the vendor-specific distribution of values is mandatory for interpreting results obtained with different machines. If all four techniques behave closely in low values allowing excluding advanced chronic liver diseases in larger populations, discrepancies are observed in high percentile values.