Kang HJ, et al. Korean J Radiol. 2019 Jul;20(7):1114-1123. https://doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2018.0932

Park HJ, et al. Korean J Radiol. 2022 Jul;23(7):720-731. https://doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2021.0892

The purpose of this study was to retrospectively compare the technical success and reliability of the measurements made using two 2-dimensional (2D) shear wave elastography (SWE) systems using the comb-push technique from the same manufacturer and to assess the intersystem reproducibility of the resultant liver stiffness (LS) measurements. Ninety-four patients with suspected chronic liver diseases were included in this retrospective study. LS measurements were obtained using two 2D-SWE systems (LOGIQ E9 and LOGIQ S8) from the same manufacturer, with transient elastography (TE) serving as the reference standard, on the same day. The technical success rates and reliability of the measurements of the two 2D-SWE systems were compared. LS values measured using the two 2D-SWE systems and TE were correlated using Spearman correlation coefficients and 95% Bland-Altman limits of agreement. Thereafter, Bland-Altman limits of agreement and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were used to analyze the intersystem reproducibility of LS measurements. The two 2D-SWE systems showed similar technical success rates (98.9% for both) and reliability of LS measurements (92.3% for the LOGIQ E9, 91.2% for the LOGIQ S8; P=0.185). Despite the excellent correlation (ICC=0.92), the mean LS measurements obtained by the two 2D-SWE systems were significantly different (LOGIQ E9, 6.57±2.33 kPa; LOGIQ S8, 6.90±6.64 kPa; P=0.018). Significant intersystem variability was observed in the LS measurements made using the two 2D-SWE systems. Therefore, even 2D-SWE systems from the same manufacturer should not be used interchangeably in longitudinal follow-up.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the technical success rate and reliability of measurements made using three shear wave elastography (SWE) techniques and to assess the inter-platform reproducibility of the resultant liver stiffness measurements. Methods: This prospective study included 54 patients with liver disease. Liver stiffness (LS) measurements were obtained using 2-point SWE techniques (Virtual Touch Quantification and S-Shearwave) and 2-dimensional (2D) SWE, with transient elastography (TE) serving as the reference standard. The technical success rates and measurement reliability of the three techniques were compared. LS values measured using the three SWE techniques and TE were compared using Spearman correlation coefficients and 95% Bland-Altman limits of agreement. Intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC) were used to analyze the inter-platform reproducibility of LS measurements. Results: The three SWE techniques and TE showed similar technical success rates (P=0.682) but demonstrated significant differences in the reliability of LS measurements (P=0.006) and mean LS measurements (P<0.001). Despite strong correlations (r=0.73-0.94) between SWE systems, various degrees of inter-platform reproducibility (ICC, 0.58-0.92) were observed for the three SWE techniques. The best agreement was observed between S-Shearwave and TE (ICC, 0.92), and the worst agreement was observed between 2D-SWE and TE (ICC, 0.58). In the Bland-Altman analysis, a tendency toward lower LS values with the three SWE techniques than with TE in patients with F3 and F4 disease was observed. Conclusion: Significant inter-system variability was observed in LS measurements made using the three SWE techniques. Therefore, LS values measured using different SWE techniques should not be used interchangeably for longitudinal follow-up.

This study was conducted to determine which factors influence the ability of abdominal ultrasonography (US) to detect focal pancreatic lesions identified using endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS). In this study, 338 consecutive patients with focal pancreatic lesions (cyst, n=253; adenocarcinoma, n=54; pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor, n=24; solid pseudopapillary neoplasm, n=4; intrapancreatic accessory spleen, n=1; metastasis, n=1; and lymphoma, n=1) detected by EUS who underwent US were enrolled. We reviewed their radiologic reports and assessed the presence or absence of a focal lesion, the multiplicity of the lesions, and their size and location on US. We evaluated how these parameters differed depending on whether the lesion was solid or cystic. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis were performed. The overall detection rate of focal pancreatic lesions by US was 61.5% (208 of 338). Using US, the detection rate of cystic lesions was 58.5% (148 of 253), while that of solid lesions was 70.6% (60 of 85). In the univariate analysis, location in the neck or body, solid characteristics, and a relatively large size (15.50±10.08 mm vs. 23.09±12.93 mm) were associated with a significantly higher detection rate (P<0.001, P=0.047, and P<0.001, respectively). In the multivariate analysis, location in the neck or body (odds ratio [OR], 3.238; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.926 to 5.443; P<0.001) and size (OR, 1.070; 95% CI, 1.044 to 1.096; P<0.001) were proven to be significant predictors of detectability (P<0.001). US is useful for detecting focal pancreatic lesions, especially when they are located in the neck or body and are relatively large.

Song WH, et al. Investig Clin Urol. 2025 Sep;66(5):405-415. https://doi.org/10.4111/icu.20250208