肝脏 ›› 2025, Vol. 30 ›› Issue (10): 1384-1388.

• 代谢相关脂肪性肝病 • 上一篇    下一篇

超声TE、SWE及RTE技术在代谢相关脂肪性肝病肝硬度值评价中的应用

屈珍, 周亚宁, 肖洒   

  1. 710061 西安 西安市精神卫生中心/西安市精神卫生研究院医学影像二科(屈珍,肖洒);710068 西安 陕西省人民医院超声诊断中心(周亚宁)
  • 收稿日期:2024-11-20 出版日期:2025-10-31 发布日期:2025-12-16
  • 基金资助:
    陕西省自然科学基础研究计划面上项目(2020JM-399)

Application of ultrasound TE, SWE, and RTE technologies in evaluating liver stiffness in metabolic associated fatty liver disease

QU Zhen1, ZHOU Ya-ning2, XIAO Sa1   

  1. 1. Department of the Second Imaging Medicine, Xi′an Mental Health Center/Xi′an Institute of Mental Health, Xi′an 710100,China;
    2. Ultrasound Diagnosis Center, Shaanxi Provincial People's Hospital,Xi′an 710068,China
  • Received:2024-11-20 Online:2025-10-31 Published:2025-12-16

摘要: 目的 探讨超声瞬时弹性成像(TE)、剪切波弹性成像(SWE)及实时弹性成像(RTE)技术在代谢相关脂肪性肝病(MAFLD)患者肝硬度值评价中的应用效果。方法 回顾性分析2021年2月至2024年2月在我院就诊的104例MAFLD患者的临床资料。根据Metavir评分标准,将患者分为以下3组:F0~1脂肪肝组41例、F2~3肝纤维化组35例和F4肝硬化组28例。所有患者均接受RTE、TE和SWE三种超声弹性成像技术检查并测量肝硬度值,采用受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线比较不同技术对MAFLD肝纤维化的诊断价值。结果 TE、SWE和RTE三种技术测得各组之间的肝硬度值差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。随着肝纤维化程度的升高,RTE、TE和SWE检测的肝硬度值均增高,且与肝纤维化程度呈正相关(TE: r=0.706, SWE: r=0.742, RTE: r=739,均P<0.05)。RTE、TE和SWE对肝纤维化(F2~3组)与肝硬化(F4组)的曲线下面积(AUC)分别为0.912/0.824,0.924/0.853,0.955/0.804,灵敏度分别为88.9%/96.4%、81.0%/78.6%、88.9%/96.4%,特异度分别为95.1%/61.8%、97.6%/81.6%、90.2%/53.9%。其中,TE和SWE的诊断价值优于RTE。结论 在MAFLD的诊断中,超声弹性成像技术(TE、SWE和RTE)可有效评估肝硬度值。三种技术均能准确反映肝纤维化的程度,其中TE和SWE在诊断肝纤维化和肝硬化方面的表现优于RTE,临床上可根据具体情况选择合适的技术以提高诊断准确性。

关键词: 超声瞬时弹性成像, 剪切波弹性成像, 实时弹性成像, 代谢相关脂肪性肝病, 肝硬度值

Abstract: Objective This study explores the effectiveness of Transient Elastography (TE), Shear Wave Elastography (SWE), and Real-Time Elastography (RTE) in assessing liver stiffness values in patients with metabolic associated fatty liver disease(MAFLD). Methods A retrospective analysis was conducted on the clinical data of 104 MAFLD patients who visited our hospital from February 2021 to February 2024. According to the Metavir scoring system, patients were divided into three groups: 41 in the F0~1 steatosis group, 35 in the F2~3 fibrosis group, and 28 in the F4 cirrhosis group. All patients underwent RTE, TE, and SWE ultrasound elastography examinations to measure liver stiffness, with the diagnostic value for MAFLD fibrosis assessed using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. Results Significant differences were observed in liver stiffness measurements between the groups for all three techniques (P<0.05). As the degree of fibrosis increased, the liver stiffness values measured by RTE, TE, and SWE also increased, correlating positively with the degree of fibrosis (TE: r=0.706, SWE: r=0.742, RTE: r=0.739, all P<0.05). The area under the curve (AUC) for RTE, TE, and SWE in diagnosing significant fibrosis (F≥2) and cirrhosis (F4) were 0.912/0.824, 0.924/0.853, and 0.955/0.804, respectively, with sensitivities of 88.9%/96.4%, 81.0%/78.6%, and 88.9%/96.4%, and specificities of 95.1%/61.8%, 97.6%/81.6%, and 90.2%/53.9%, respectively. Among these, TE and SWE showed superior diagnostic values over RTE. Conclusion In the diagnosis of MAFLD, ultrasound elastography techniques (TE, SWE, and RTE) effectively assess liver stiffness. All three techniques accurately reflect the extent of liver fibrosis, with TE and SWE performing better in diagnosing fibrosis and cirrhosis. Clinically, the appropriate technology can be selected based on specific circumstances to improve diagnostic accuracy.

Key words: Transient elastography, Shear wave elastography, Real-time elastography, Metabolic associated fatty liver disease, Liver stiffness