Stereological analysis of liver biopsy histology sections as a reference standard for validating non-invasive liver fat fraction measurements by MRI

© 2016 St. Pierre et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.Background and Aims: Validation of non-invasive methods of liver fat quantification requires a reference standard. However, using standard histopathology assessment of liver biopsies is problematical because of poor repeatability. We aimed to assess a stereological method of measuring volumetric liver fat fraction (VLFF) in liver biopsies and to use the method to validate a magnetic resonance imaging method for measurement of VLFF. Methods: VLFFs were measured in 59 subjects (1) by three independent analysts using a stereological point counting technique combined with the Delesse principle on liver biopsy histological sections and (2) by three independent analysts using the HepaFat-Scan® technique on magnetic resonance images of the liver. Bland Altman statistics and intraclass correlation (IC) were used to assess the repeatability of each method and the bias between the methods of liver fat fraction measurement. Results: Inter-analyst repeatability coefficients for the stereology and HepaFat-Scan® methods were 8.2 (95% CI 7.7-8.8)% and 2.4 (95% CI 2.2-2.5)% VLFF respectively. IC coefficients were 0.86 (95% CI 0.69-0.93) and 0.990 (95% CI 0.985-0.994) respectively. Small biases (=3.4%) were observable between two pairs of analysts using stereology while no significant biases were observable between any of the three pairs of analysts using Hepa-Fat-Scan®. A bias of 1.4±0.5% VLFF was observed between the HepaFat-Scan® method and the stereological method. Conclusions: Repeatability of the stereological method is superior to the previously reported performance of assessment of hepatic steatosis by histopathologists and is a suitable reference standard for validating non-invasive methods of measurement of VLFF

The diagnostic accuracy of US, CT, MRI and 1H-MRS for the evaluation of hepatic steatosis compared with liver biopsy: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE: To meta-analyse the diagnostic accuracy of US, CT, MRI and (1)H-MRS for the evaluation of hepatic steatosis. METHODS: From a comprehensive literature search in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and Cochrane (up to November 2009), articles were selected that investigated the diagnostic performance imaging techniques for evaluating hepatic steatosis with histopathology as the reference standard. Cut-off values for the presence of steatosis on liver biopsy were subdivided into four groups: (1) >0, >2 and >5% steatosis; (2) >10, >15 and >20%; (3) >25, >30 and >33%; (4) >50, >60 and >66%. Per group, summary estimates for sensitivity and specificity were calculated. The natural-logarithm of the diagnostic odds ratio (lnDOR) was used as a single indicator of test performance. RESULTS: 46 articles were included. Mean sensitivity estimates for subgroups were 73.3-90.5% (US), 46.1-72.0% (CT), 82.0-97.4% (MRI) and 72.7-88.5% ((1)H-MRS). Mean specificity ranges were 69.6-85.2% (US), 88.1-94.6% (CT), 76.1-95.3% (MRI) and 92.0-95.7% ((1)H-MRS). Overall performance (lnDOR) of MRI and (1)H-MRS was better than that for US and CT for all subgroups, with significant differences in groups 1 and 2. CONCLUSION: MRI and (1)H-MRS can be considered techniques of choice for accurate evaluation of hepatic steatosi

Secondary Endoleak Management Following TEVAR and EVAR.

Endovascular abdominal and thoracic aortic aneurysm repair and are widely used to treat increasingly complex aneurysms. Secondary endoleaks, defined as those detected more than 30 days after the procedure and after previous negative imaging, remain a challenge for aortic specialists, conferring a need for long-term surveillance and reintervention. Endoleaks are classified on the basis of their anatomic site and aetiology. Type 1 and type 2 endoleaks (EL1 and EL2) are the most common endoleaks necessitating intervention. The management of these requires an understanding of their mechanics, and the risk of sac enlargement and rupture due to increased sac pressure. Endovascular techniques are the main treatment approach to manage secondary endoleaks. However, surgery should be considered where endovascular treatments fail to arrest aneurysm growth. This chapter reviews the aetiology, significance, management strategy and techniques for different endoleak types

Antiinflammatory Therapy with Canakinumab for Atherosclerotic Disease

Background: Experimental and clinical data suggest that reducing inflammation without affecting lipid levels may reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease. Yet, the inflammatory hypothesis of atherothrombosis has remained unproved. Methods: We conducted a randomized, double-blind trial of canakinumab, a therapeutic monoclonal antibody targeting interleukin-1β, involving 10,061 patients with previous myocardial infarction and a high-sensitivity C-reactive protein level of 2 mg or more per liter. The trial compared three doses of canakinumab (50 mg, 150 mg, and 300 mg, administered subcutaneously every 3 months) with placebo. The primary efficacy end point was nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or cardiovascular death. RESULTS: At 48 months, the median reduction from baseline in the high-sensitivity C-reactive protein level was 26 percentage points greater in the group that received the 50-mg dose of canakinumab, 37 percentage points greater in the 150-mg group, and 41 percentage points greater in the 300-mg group than in the placebo group. Canakinumab did not reduce lipid levels from baseline. At a median follow-up of 3.7 years, the incidence rate for the primary end point was 4.50 events per 100 person-years in the placebo group, 4.11 events per 100 person-years in the 50-mg group, 3.86 events per 100 person-years in the 150-mg group, and 3.90 events per 100 person-years in the 300-mg group. The hazard ratios as compared with placebo were as follows: in the 50-mg group, 0.93 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.80 to 1.07; P = 0.30); in the 150-mg group, 0.85 (95% CI, 0.74 to 0.98; P = 0.021); and in the 300-mg group, 0.86 (95% CI, 0.75 to 0.99; P = 0.031). The 150-mg dose, but not the other doses, met the prespecified multiplicity-adjusted threshold for statistical significance for the primary end point and the secondary end point that additionally included hospitalization for unstable angina that led to urgent revascularization (hazard ratio vs. placebo, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.73 to 0.95; P = 0.005). Canakinumab was associated with a higher incidence of fatal infection than was placebo. There was no significant difference in all-cause mortality (hazard ratio for all canakinumab doses vs. placebo, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.06; P = 0.31). Conclusions: Antiinflammatory therapy targeting the interleukin-1β innate immunity pathway with canakinumab at a dose of 150 mg every 3 months led to a significantly lower rate of recurrent cardiovascular events than placebo, independent of lipid-level lowering. (Funded by Novartis; CANTOS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01327846.