DIAGNOSTIC SIGNIFICANCE OF VARIOUS RADIOLOGICAL METHODS IN THE DETECTION OF PATHOLOGICAL CHANGES IN THE LIVER AGAINST OF BACKGROUND OF DIABETES MELLITUS

Authors:

Abstract:

The purpose of the study was to assess the sensitivity and specificity of different radiological methods in the diagnosis of various pathologies of the liver in patients with diabetes. In the 162 patients with diabetes mellitus with foci of metastasis in the liver, the above parameters (sensitivity and specificity) were calculated according to the results obtained by different methods. ultrasound, computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging for determination of localization of foci in different lobes of liver. At the next stage of study out of 155 patients with liver metastases, 96 people were examined by ultrasound, 43 were examined by computed tomography and 16 patients were examined by magnetic resonance imaging to find out changes in the contours of the liver. Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value and negative predictive value were studied for each diagnostic methods. According to results, diagnostic value parameters for patients with metastatic foci in the liver examined by ultrasound, were sensitivity=1, specificity=0.9642, accuracy=0.9791, positive predictive value=0.9523 and negative predictive value=1. For magnetic resonance imaging, the parameters of diagnostic value were as following: sensitivity=1, specificity=0.8888, accuracy=0.9375, positive predictive value=0.8750 and negative predictive value=1. For multispiral computed tomography, the parameters of diagnostic value were as following: sensitivity=1, specificity=0.9200, accuracy=0.9534, positive predictive value=0.9 and negative predictive value=1. Thus, in patients with diabetes mellitus and fatty dystrophy with liver metastases and other pathological foci, along with the combination of several radiological methods, their specificity and sensitivity indicators should be taken into account.

Keywords:

diabetes mellitus liver steatosis metastasis magnetic resonance imaging computed tomography ultrasound

References:

1. Bartolotta TV, Taibbi A, Picone D, Anastasi A, Midiri M, Lagalla R. Detection of liver metastases in cancer patients with geographic fatty infiltration of the liver: the added value of contrast-enhanced sonography. Ultrasonography. 2017 Apr;36(2):160–169. doi: 10.14366/usg.16041.
2. Cheon SY, Song J. Novel insights into non-alcoholic fatty liver disease and dementia: insulin resistance, hyperammonemia, gut dysbiosis, vascular impairment, and inflammation. Cell Biosci. 2022 Jun 28;12(1):99. doi: 10.1186/s13578-022-00836-0.
3. Kong WT, Ji ZB, Wang WP, Cai H, Huang BJ, Ding H. Evaluation of Liver Metastases Using Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound: Enhancement Patterns and Influencing Factors. Gut Liver. 2016 Mar;10(2):283–7. doi: 10.5009/gnl14324.
4. Lee CH, Han KD, Kim DH, Kwak MS. The Repeatedly Elevated Fatty Liver Index Is Associated With Increased Mortality: A Population-Based Cohort Study. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2021 Mar 12;12:638615. doi: 10.3389/fendo.2021.638615.
5. Makri E, Goulas A, Polyzos SA. Epidemiology, Pathogenesis, Diagnosis and Emerging Treatment of Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease. Arch Med Res. 2021 Jan;52(1):25–37. doi: 10.1016/j.arcmed.2020.11.010.
6. Murag S, Ahmed A, Kim D. Recent Epidemiology of Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease. Gut Liver. 2021 Mar 15;15(2):206–216. doi: 10.5009/gnl20127.
7. Pouwels S, Sakran N, Graham Y, Leal A, Pintar T, Yang W, et al. Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD): a review of pathophysiology, clinical management and effects of weight loss. BMC EndocrDisord. 2022 Mar 14;22(1):63. doi: 10.1186/s12902-022-00980-1.
8. Sahani DV, Bajwa MA, Andrabi Y, Bajpai S, Cusack JC. Current status of imaging and emerging techniques to evaluate liver metastases from colorectal carcinoma. Ann Surg. 2014 May;259(5):861–72. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000000525.
9. Skrypnyk IM, Maslova GS, Lymanets TV. Overweight and obesity as risk factors for chemotherapy-induced hepatotoxicity in patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia. World of Medicine and Biology. 2022; 2 (80):146–150.doi: 10.26724/2079-8334-2022-2-80-146-150
10. Starekova J, Reeder SB. Liver fat quantification: where do we stand? AbdomRadiol (NY). 2020 Nov;45(11):3386-3399. doi: 10.1007/s00261-020-02783-1.
11. Tang YC, Tsui PH, Wang CY, Chien YH, Weng HL, Yang CY, et al. Hepatic Steatosis Assessment as a New Strategy for the Metabolic and Nutritional Management of Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy. Nutrients. 2022 Feb 9;14(4):727. doi: 10.3390/nu14040727.
12. Tirumani SH, Kim KW, Nishino M, Howard SA, Krajewski KM, Jagannathan JP, et al. Update on the role of imaging in management of metastatic colorectal cancer. Radiographics. 2014 Nov-Dec;34(7):1908–28. doi: 10.1148/rg.347130090.
13. Vernuccio F, Cannella R, Bartolotta TV, Galia M, Tang A, Brancatelli G. Advances in liver US, CT, and MRI: moving toward the future. Eur Radiol Exp. 2021 Dec 7;5(1):52. doi: 10.1186/s41747-021-00250-0.
14. Zhang YN, Fowler KJ, Hamilton G, Cui JY, Sy EZ, Balanay M, et al. Liver fat imaging-a clinical overview of ultrasound, CT, and MR imaging. Br J Radiol. 2018 Sep;91(1089):20170959. doi: 10.1259/bjr.20170959.
15. Zhang PP, Choi HH, Ohliger MA. Detection of fatty liver using virtual non-contrast dual-energy CT. AbdomRadiol (NY). 2022 Jun;47(6):2046–2056. doi: 10.1007/s00261-022-03482-9.

Publication:

«World of Medicine and Biology» Vol. 19 No. 84 (2023) , с. 115-118
УДК 616.36–003.4–006–073.7

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.26724/2079-8334-2023-2-84-115-118