Abdominal Radiology

, Volume 44, Issue 10, pp 3285–3294 | Cite as

2D shear wave elastography: measurement acquisition and reliability criteria in noninvasive assessment of liver fibrosis

  • Maggie ChungEmail author
  • Grayson L. Baird
  • Krista E. Weiss
  • Michael D. Beland



The objective was to evaluate the accuracy of 2D shear wave elastography (SWE) in predicting stages of liver fibrosis using five individual versus grouped measurements and different reliability criteria.

Materials and methods

This is a prospective study of 109 patients who underwent hepatic 2D SWE (Canon Aplio 500) prior to liver biopsy for varied indications. Liver fibrosis was staged using the METAVIR scoring system (F = 0–4). Propagation mapping was used to guide ten SWE measurements from the liver parenchyma: five individual measurements and five grouped measurements. IQR/median, SD/median, and SD/mean were examined as quality criteria for patient inclusion at various thresholds (IQR/median ≤ 0.15, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5; SD/median ≤ 0.15, 0.2, 0.3; SD/mean ≤ 0.2, 0.3, 0.5). Threshold for clinically significant fibrosis (F ≥ 2) was determined with receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis.


There was high agreement between individual and grouped measurements without statistically significant differences (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.82; p = 0.26–0.96). When no quality criterion was used (n = 103), the optimal threshold was 11.3 kPa [AUROC 0.78, 95% CI (0.69, 0.88)] with sensitivity and specificity of 80% and 66%, respectively. All quality criteria were associated with equal or higher AUROC ranging from 0.78 to 0.87. IQR/median ≤ 0.5 (n = 88) achieved the highest sensitivity of 85% and only excluded a small subset of patients. The AUROC and specificity were 0.83 [95% CI (0.74, 0.92)] and 72%, respectively.


Quality criterion IQR/median ≤ 0.5 increases sensitivity and specificity in prediction of clinically significant liver fibrosis while excluding only a small subset of patients. Grouped measurements are comparable to individual measurements and may help increase procedural efficiency.


Two-dimensional shear wave Elastography Liver cirrhosis Ultrasonography 


Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

Michael Beland: Received an equipment grant from Canon Medical Systems Corporation. All the other authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

IRB: This study was a prospective, single-center study approved by the Institutional Review Board.


  1. 1.
    Asrani SK, Larson JJ, Yawn B, Therneau TM, Kim WR. Underestimation of Liver-Related Mortality in the United States. Gastroenterology. 2013;145(2):375-382.e2. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bell BP, Manos MM, Zaman A, et al. The Epidemiology of Newly Diagnosed Chronic Liver Disease in Gastroenterology Practices in the United States: Results From Population-Based Surveillance. Am J Gastroenterol. 2008;103(11):2727-2736. doi:10.1111/j.1572-0241.2008.02071.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Tapper EB, Lok AS-F. Use of Liver Imaging and Biopsy in Clinical Practice. Longo DL, ed. N Engl J Med. 2017;377(8):756-768.
  4. 4.
    Janes CH, Lindor KD. Outcome of patients hospitalized for complications after outpatient liver biopsy. Ann Intern Med. 1993;118(2):96-98. Accessed May 6, 2018.
  5. 5.
    Bravo AA, Sheth SG, Chopra S. Liver Biopsy. N Engl J Med. 2001;344(7):495-500. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Barr RG, Ferraioli G, Palmeri ML, et al. Elastography Assessment of Liver Fibrosis: Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound Consensus Conference Statement. Radiology. 2015;276(3):845-861. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dietrich CF, Bamber J, Berzigotti A, et al. EFSUMB Guidelines and Recommendations on the Clinical Use of Liver Ultrasound Elastography, Update 2017 (Long Version) EFSUMB-Leitlinien und Empfehlungen zur klinischen Anwendung der Leberelastographie, Update 2017 (Langversion) Guidelines & Recommendations Dietrich CF et al. EFSUMB Guidelines and… Ultraschall in Med Basic Principles and Technology.
  8. 8.
    Thiele M, Madsen B, Procopet B, et al. Reliability Criteria for Liver Stiffness Measurements with Real-Time 2D Shear Wave Elastography in Different Clinical Scenarios of Chronic Liver Disease. Ultraschall der Medizin - Eur J Ultrasound. 2017;38(06):648-654. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zeng J, Liu G-J, Huang Z-P, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of two-dimensional shear wave elastography for the non-invasive staging of hepatic fibrosis in chronic hepatitis B: a cohort study with internal validation. Eur Radiol. 2014;24(10):2572-2581. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Yoon JH, Lee JM, Han JK, Cho BI. Shear Wave Elastography for Liver Stiffness Measurement in Clinical Sonographic Examinations. J Ultrasound Med. 2014;33(3):437-447. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sporea I, Grădinaru-Taşcău O, Bota S, et al. How many measurements are needed for liver stiffness assessment by 2D-Shear Wave Elastography (2D-SWE) and which value should be used: the mean or median? Med Ultrason. 2013;15(4):268-272. Accessed May 6, 2018.
  12. 12.
    Nadebaum DP, Nicoll AJ, Sood S, Gorelik A, Gibson RN. Variability of Liver Shear Wave Measurements Using a New Ultrasound Elastographic Technique. J Ultrasound Med. 2017.
  13. 13.
    Ferraioli G, Wong VW-S, Castera L, et al. Liver Ultrasound Elastography: An Update to the World Federation for Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology Guidelines and Recommendations. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2018;44(12):2419-2440.
  14. 14.
    Song P, Mellema DC, Sheedy SP, et al. Performance of 2-Dimensional Ultrasound Shear Wave Elastography in Liver Fibrosis Detection Using Magnetic Resonance Elastography as the Reference Standard: A Pilot Study. J Ultrasound Med. 2016;35(2):401-412. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Procopet B, Berzigotti A, Abraldes JG, et al. Real-time shear-wave elastography: applicability, reliability and accuracy for clinically significant portal hypertension. J Hepatol. 2015;62(5):1068-1075. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lim S, Kim SH, Kim Y, et al. Coefficient of Variance as Quality Criterion for Evaluation of Advanced Hepatic Fibrosis Using 2D Shear-Wave Elastography. J Ultrasound Med. 2018;37(2):355-362. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Cicchetti D V. Guidelines, criteria, and rules of thumb for evaluating normed and standardized assessment instruments in psychology. Psychol Assess. 1994;6(4):284-290. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Goldstein NS, Hastah F, Galan M V., Gordon SC. Fibrosis Heterogeneity in Nonalcoholic Steatohepatitis and Hepatitis C Virus Needle Core Biopsy Specimens. Am J Clin Pathol. 2005;123(3):382-387. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Mulabecirovic A, Mjelle AB, Gilja OH, Vesterhus M, Havre RF. Liver elasticity in healthy individuals by two novel shear-wave elastography systems—Comparison by age, gender, BMI and number of measurements. Strnad P, ed. PLoS One. 2018;13(9):e0203486.
  20. 20.
    Xie L-T, Yan C-H, Zhao Q-Y, He M-N, Jiang T-A. Quantitative and noninvasive assessment of chronic liver diseases using two-dimensional shear wave elastography. World J Gastroenterol. 2018;24(9):957-970. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sigrist RMS, Liau J, Kaffas A El, Chammas MC, Willmann JK. Ultrasound Elastography: Review of Techniques and Clinical Applications. Theranostics. 2017;7(5):1303-1329. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Schellhaas B, Strobel D, Wildner D, Goertz RS, Neurath MF, Pfeifer L. Two-dimensional shear-wave elastography: A new method comparable to acoustic radiation force impulse imaging? Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2017;29(6):723-729. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Cassinotto C, Boursier J, de Lédinghen V, et al. Liver stiffness in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: A comparison of supersonic shear imaging, FibroScan, and ARFI with liver biopsy. Hepatology. 2016;63(6):1817-1827. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Cassinotto C, Lapuyade B, Mouries A, et al. Non-invasive assessment of liver fibrosis with impulse elastography: Comparison of Supersonic Shear Imaging with ARFI and FibroScan®. J Hepatol. 2014;61(3):550-557. CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Radiology and Biomedical ImagingUniversity of California, San FranciscoSan FranciscoUSA
  2. 2.Lifespan Biostatistics Core, Rhode Island HospitalProvidenceUSA
  3. 3.Department of Diagnostic ImagingWarren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Rhode Island HospitalProvidenceUSA

Personalised recommendations