Applicability and variability of liver stiffness measurements according to probe position

Table 2 Liver stiffness measurements applicability

Position, operator and quality criteria	Applicability (%)	Presumed fibrosis stages among applicable patients F0F1/F2/F3/F4 n (%)c
Reference position	306/442 (69)a	167 (55)/59 (19)/51 (17)/29 (9)d
Operator 1	208/329 (63)	117 (56)/40 (19)/32 (15)/19 (9)
Valid10	312/329 (95)
SR60	300/329 (91)
IQR30	220/329 (67)
Operator 2	98/113 (87)	50 (51)/19 (19)/19 (19)/10 (10)
Valid10	113/113 (100)
SR60	113/113 (100)
IQR30	98/113 (87)
Anterior position	357/442 (81)a	223 (62)/52 (15)/49 (14)/33 (9)d
Operator 1	255/329 (78)	166 (65)/34 (13)/31 (12)/24 (9)
Valid10	300/329 (91)
SR60	296/329 (90)
IQR30	271/329 (82)b
Operator 2	102/113 (90)	57 (56)/18 (18)/18 (18)/9 (9)
Valid10	111/113 (98)
SR60	111/113 (98)
IQR30	103/113 (91)b
Lower position	302/442 (68)a	170 (56)/49 (16)/47 (16)/36 (12)
Operator 1	224/329 (68)	126 (56)/36 (16)/36 (16)/26 (12)
Valid10	299/329 (91)
SR60	291/329 (88)
IQR30	240/329 (73)b
Operator 2	78/113 (69)	44 (56)/13 (17)/11 (14)/10 (13)
Valid10	96/113 (85)
SR60	94/113 (83)
IQR30	86/113 (76)b

^aApplicability of the anterior position was significantly higher than that of the reference and the lower positions (both P = 0.0001);

^bIQR30 was obtained more frequently with the anterior position than with the reference and lower positions for operator 1 (82% vs 67% P < 0.0001; 82% vs 73% P = 0.004) and for operator 2 (91% vs 87% P = 0.40; 91% vs 76% P = 0.004);

^cPresumed fibrosis stage (METAVIR scoring system) using 7.7 kPa for F2, 8.8 kPa for F3 and 14.5 kPa for F4;

^dPresumed prevalence of non-advanced fibrosis was lower using the reference position than the anterior position (P = 0.04).