Screening for non-alcoholic fatty liver disease using liver stiffness measurement and its association with chronic kidney disease and cardiovascular complications in patients with type 2 diabetes.

AIM: Despite the high prevalence and serious clinical implications of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), NAFLD is usually overlooked during routine diabetes care. This study explored the proportion of NAFLD cases and increased liver fibrosis (LF), and the association between LF and either chronic kidney disease (CKD) or cardiovascular complications in T2DM patients. METHODS: The study included 137 patients with non-insulin-treated T2DM and no known liver disease consecutively attending our diabetes outpatients' service who underwent liver ultrasonography and liver stiffness measurement (LSM) using vibration-controlled transient elastography (FibroScan®). RESULTS: The proportion of patients with hepatic steatosis on ultrasonography was 73.7%, and the proportion with significant LF was 17.5% with an LSM cut-off ≥7kPa or 10.2% with an LSM cut-off ≥8.7kPa. The presence of CKD (estimated GFR <60mL/min/1.73m2 and/or abnormal albuminuria) increased significantly across LSM tertiles (from around 15% in tertile 1 to 45% in tertile 3). Cardiovascular complications (previous ischaemic heart disease, ischaemic stroke, permanent atrial fibrillation) also tended to increase across LSM tertiles (from around 15% to 30%). After adjusting for established risk factors and potential confounders, LSM tertile 3 remained significantly associated with an approximately threefold higher risk of prevalent CKD (adjusted OR: 3.28, 95% CI: 1.22-8.90; P=0.019), but not for cardiovascular complications. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that NAFLD and significant LF (as assessed by FibroScan®) are very commonly seen in T2DM outpatients with no known liver disease attending a secondary-care diabetes service, and that increased LF is associated with a greater proportion of chronic vascular complications, especially CKD.

Correction to: Point shear wave ultrasound elastography with Esaote compared to real-time 2D shear wave elastography with supersonic imagine for the quantification of liver stiffness.

Unfortunately, in the first sentence under the section head "Point shear wave elastography", the transducer name was misspelled as CA541 (rather than CA451).

Point shear wave ultrasound elastography with Esaote compared to real-time 2D shear wave elastography with supersonic imagine for the quantification of liver stiffness.

PURPOSE: Different shear wave elastography (SWE) machines able to quantify liver stiffness (LS) have been recently introduced by various companies. The aim of this study was to investigate the agreement between point SWE with Esaote MyLab Twice (pSWE.ESA) and 2D SWE with Aixplorer SuperSonic (2D SWE.SSI). Moreover, we assessed the correlation of these machines with Fibroscan in a subgroup of patients. METHODS: A total of 81 liver disease patients and 27 subjects without liver disease accessing the ultrasound lab were considered. Exclusion criteria were liver nodules, BMI >35, and severe comorbidities. LS was sampled from the same intercostal space with both pSWE.ESA and 2D SWE.SSI and values were tested with Lin's analysis and Bland-Altman analysis (B&A). Agreement between each SWE machine and Fibroscan was assessed in 26 liver disease patients with Spearman correlation. RESULTS: Precision and accuracy between pSWE.ESA and 2D SWE.SSI were, respectively, 0.839 and 0.999. B&A showed a mean of only -0.2 kPa, with no systematic deviation between the techniques and limits of agreement at -11.6 and 11.3 kPa. Spearman's rho correlation versus Fibroscan was 0.849 for pSWE.ESA and 0.878 for 2D SWE.SSI. The relationship became less strict in the higher range of LS (≥15.2 kPa), corresponding to cirrhosis. CONCLUSION: The overall degree of concordance of pSWE.ESA and 2D SWE.SSI in measuring LS resulted remarkable, also when compared with Fibroscan. The less strict correlation for patients with LS in the higher range would not affect the staging of disease as such patients are anyhow classified as cirrhotic.