Prevalent Cardiovascular Disease Events and T1 Mapping Defined Hepatic Fibrosis
2018; Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; Volume: 11; Issue: 3 Linguagem: Inglês
10.1161/circimaging.118.007553
ISSN1942-0080
AutoresMichelle T. Long, Emelia J. Benjamin,
Tópico(s)Diet, Metabolism, and Disease
ResumoHomeCirculation: Cardiovascular ImagingVol. 11, No. 3Prevalent Cardiovascular Disease Events and T1 Mapping Defined Hepatic Fibrosis Free AccessEditorialPDF/EPUBAboutView PDFView EPUBSections ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload citationsTrack citationsPermissions ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InMendeleyReddit Jump toFree AccessEditorialPDF/EPUBPrevalent Cardiovascular Disease Events and T1 Mapping Defined Hepatic Fibrosis Michelle T. Long, MD and Emelia J. Benjamin, MD, ScM Michelle T. LongMichelle T. Long From the Section of Gastroenterology, Boston Medical Center (M.T.L.) and Evans Department of Medicine, Whitaker Cardiovascular Institute and Cardiology Section (E.J.B.), Boston University School of Medicine, MA; and Department of Epidemiology (E.J.B.) and Boston Medical Center (E.J.B.), Boston University School of Public Health, MA. and Emelia J. BenjaminEmelia J. Benjamin From the Section of Gastroenterology, Boston Medical Center (M.T.L.) and Evans Department of Medicine, Whitaker Cardiovascular Institute and Cardiology Section (E.J.B.), Boston University School of Medicine, MA; and Department of Epidemiology (E.J.B.) and Boston Medical Center (E.J.B.), Boston University School of Public Health, MA. Originally published9 Mar 2018https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCIMAGING.118.007553Circulation: Cardiovascular Imaging. 2018;11:e007553Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is defined by the presence of hepatic steatosis in at least 5% of hepatocytes in the absence of secondary causes, such as viral hepatitis, steatogenic medications, or moderate-to-heavy alcohol consumption.1 NAFLD, the leading cause of chronic liver disease in the United States, represents a spectrum of histological findings, including simple steatosis, lobular inflammation, and hepatic fibrosis, which can progress to end-stage liver disease.2 In addition to the risk for advanced liver disease, patients are at increased risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD), which remains the leading cause of death in NAFLD.3See Article by Ostovaneh et alNumerous possible underlying mechanisms may contribute to the increased CVD risk in NAFLD. First, worsened insulin resistance,3,4 possibly from decreased insulin clearance and hyperinsulinemia,5 results in increased free fatty acid release from adipose tissue. Patients with NAFLD have increased fatty acid transport receptors in the liver, which results in increased uptake of plasma free fatty acids.6 There is also an increase in triglyceride synthesis in the liver (de novo lipogenesis) in NAFLD, possibly from hepatic insulin resistance and an inability of insulin to suppress gluconeogenesis. Ultimately, increased fatty acid uptake and increased triglyceride synthesis result in an accumulation of hepatic triglycerides, further worsening fatty liver.6 The liver secretes triglycerides into the blood as very-low-density lipoprotein. Triglyceride-rich very-low-density lipoproteins are broken down in the periphery to triglycerides and intermediate-density and low-density lipoproteins. In NAFLD, there is an increase in hepatic very-low-density lipoprotein secretion and accumulation of triglycerides and low-density lipoproteins in the blood which increases the risk for atherosclerosis.7 Second, excess free fatty acids induce inflammatory mediators and oxidative stress in hepatocytes, which may result in metabolic lipotoxicity8 and endothelial dysfunction.9,10 Finally, NAFLD is associated with decreased glucagon-like peptide 1 hormone receptor levels and reduced uptake of glucagon-like peptide 1, which normally plays an important role in glucose metabolism and is protective against CVD. However, the specific underlying mechanisms linking NAFLD with CVD are not fully understood, and the degree to which NAFLD independently contributes to CVD is unknown.11Noninvasive Assessment of Hepatic Fat and FibrosisOne limitation to our knowledge on the connection between NAFLD and CVD stems from the fact that the majority of NAFLD research has focused on hepatic steatosis instead of the more pathologically relevant phenotypes of steatohepatitis and hepatic fibrosis. Individuals with more advanced NAFLD, particularly hepatic fibrosis, are at highest risk for liver-related12 and CVD-related death13 and overall mortality.14 Although the gold standard for the diagnosis of NAFLD is liver biopsy, it is unethical and impractical to perform on a large scale, and liver biopsy may be inaccurate because of significant sampling variability.15 NAFLD is typically diagnosed using abdominal imaging, such as ultrasonography, computed tomography, or magnetic resonance spectroscopy, to characterize the presence and degree of hepatic steatosis. The diagnosis of more advanced NAFLD is challenging because traditional liver imaging techniques are insensitive to hepatic fibrosis, particularly mild or moderate fibrosis.16Recently, several noninvasive tools to detect and quantify hepatic fibrosis have become available. Several blood-based diagnostic tools that correlate with hepatic fibrosis have been developed, such as the NAFLD fibrosis score,17 the Enhanced Liver Fibrosis panel,18 and fibrosis-specific biomarkers.19 However, most of these models were derived in hospital-based samples, which have higher disease prevalence than the general population, and most biomarkers have limited usefulness clinically and in population-based studies.20,21Of potential promise for the noninvasive detection of hepatic fibrosis are vibration-controlled transient elastography (VCTE) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)–based elastography (MRE) protocols.22,23 VCTE is a point-of-care device that uses modified ultrasound probes to deliver pulse waves to the liver to simultaneously estimate liver fat attenuation and a fibrosis-surrogate, liver stiffness.24 Whereas VCTE has lower sensitivity and specificity for hepatic fibrosis compared with MRE,25,26 because of ease of use, VCTE is a clinically attractive option19 and is starting to be studied on a large scale.24 However, VCTE only evaluates a portion of the liver, and it can be technically challenging, especially in patients with obesity.26 MRE uses a modified phase contrast pulse sequence to image pulse waves because they propagate through the liver.27 MRE is a validated, highly accurate method for detecting hepatic fibrosis that some argue should replace liver biopsy as the gold standard because it measures hepatic fibrosis in the entire liver, and it has higher inter-reader agreement than observed with histopathology.28 However, issues with cost, technical scalability, and the time required to complete the examinations have limited the wide-scale adoption of MRE in clinical practice.27Magnetic Resonance T1 Mapping for Hepatic FibrosisNewer MRI-based imaging techniques are emerging for the assessment of hepatic fat and fibrosis. T1 mapping of the liver can now be accomplished with a single breath-hold and, as a result, interest has increased in T1 mapping as a potential modality to diagnosis hepatic fibrosis.29,30 Multiparametric MRI techniques that combine T1 mapping to evaluate hepatic fibrosis, T2* mapping to quantity hepatic iron content, along with magnetic resonance spectroscopy to quantity hepatic fat, have shown promise in studies with paired liver biopsy31; however, larger validation studies are needed. Other modalities of interest include T1 decay corrected for iron content using the Liver Multiscan platform (Perspectum Diagnostics, Oxford, UK), which was recently shown to be predictive of short-term clinical outcomes in patients with chronic liver disease.31 Also, MRI techniques that use a hepatocyte-specific gadolinium contrast agent show high sensitivity and specificity for hepatic fibrosis.32 Large prospective and comparison studies are needed for validation and to distinguish between the various tools for the noninvasive assessment of hepatic fibrosis.Magnetic Resonance T1 Mapping for Hepatic Fibrosis in a Population-Based StudyIn this issue of Circulation: Cardiovascular Imaging, Ostovaneh et al33 evaluated the cross-sectional association of a history of CVD events and computed tomography–derived measures of cardiac structure and function with hepatic fibrosis, as measured by pre- and postcontrast MRI T1 mapping of the liver, among participants of MESA (Multi-Ethnic Study of atherosclerosis). In this multiethnic cohort study of >2000 individuals (mean age, 68.7±9.1 years; 46% men), the authors demonstrated that a prior history of CVD events was associated with hepatic fibrosis as measured by precontrast T1 time but not extracellular volume fraction measures after multivariable adjustment. Extracellular volume fraction was only available in 59% of the sample (1234 of 2087), which, at least in part, may explain the discrepancy in findings. Additional adjustment for coronary artery calcium score or left ventricular mass and volume attenuated the results; however, a history of CVD events remained associated with precontrast T1 time, indicating that atherosclerosis did not completely explain the relationships between CVD and hepatic fibrosis. In the specific event analyses, a history of coronary heart disease was associated with precontrast T1 time, a history of heart failure was associated with hepatic fibrosis as measured by postcontrast extracellular volume fraction, and a history of atrial fibrillation was associated with both hepatic fibrosis measures. In addition, myocardial fibrosis was associated with both MRI-based indices of hepatic fibrosis, and a higher left ventricular ejection fraction and reduced left ventricular circumferential strain were associated with precontrast T1 time hepatic fibrosis.As acknowledged by the authors, the study has several limitations. The overall prevalence of CVD was relatively low because 895 participants died before they reached the MESA year 10 examination when liver MRI was performed. The primary analysis focused on the 153 of 2087 participants (7.3%) with a history of overall CVD, but the pathogenesis underlying the component CVD events is heterogeneous. The authors examined a composite history of 3 events: 1.2% (n=25) with heart failure, 3.7% (n=78) with atrial fibrillation, and 3.7% (n=78) with coronary heart disease. The analyses of the component prevalent events are potentially limited for several reasons, including, they had low power, adjusting for multiple confounders with small numbers is problematic, and the authors did not account for multiple testing. In addition, the authors included participants with only 1 lobe of the liver covered in the pre- and postcontrast T1 maps. However, hepatic fat and fibrosis can be segmental within the liver; it is possible that misclassification of hepatic fibrosis occurred if the T1 maps did not include images of the entire liver.34 In addition, the study was cross-sectional, observational, and adjusted for a limited set of confounders. Hence, the authors cannot determine temporality, that is, did CVD contribute to liver fibrosis, did liver fibrosis contribute to CVD, or was the association because of residual confounding or intermediate mechanisms.Whereas the Ostovaneh et al33 should be viewed as providing preliminary evidence on the association between liver fibrosis and CVD, the study makes worthwhile contributions to the literature. The authors demonstrated the feasibility of performing T1 mapping of the liver in the context of a multicenter longitudinal cohort study of CVD. Few large cohorts have imaging measures of hepatic fibrosis available; this study represents an important advance in the study of NAFLD because most prior work has focused on the study of hepatic steatosis and not fibrosis. Interestingly, computed tomography–derived liver fat attenuation at the baseline MESA examination was not associated with either measure of hepatic fibrosis at the year 10 MESA examination, which provides additional evidence that computed tomography–derived hepatic steatosis may not be a suitable surrogate for advanced NAFLD phenotypes.Future DirectionsClinicians, who not infrequently receive reports of incidentally detected NAFLD by various imaging modalities, are uncertain about what clinical steps are indicated to address the finding. It is important for clinicians to remember that advanced NAFLD may be present even if liver biochemical tests are normal. In particular, patients over the age of 60 years or who have underlying diabetes mellitus are at particularly high risk for hepatic fibrosis.1 Patients with clinical or laboratory measures suggestive of advanced NAFLD should be referred for risk stratification, ideally with advanced imaging, to stage liver fibrosis.Ostovaneh et al33 have demonstrated that CVD events and measures of cardiac structure and function are cross-sectionally related to T1 mapping–derived indices of hepatic fibrosis. Longitudinal studies are needed to determine whether hepatic fibrosis is associated with incident coronary heart disease, heart failure, and atrial fibrillation after adjustment for important confounders. Future studies correlating mapping findings to liver biopsy samples from patients with proven hepatic fibrosis would be helpful to validate T1 mapping as a sensitive and specific imaging biomarker for hepatic fibrosis. Comparison studies using various MRI- and other imaging-based techniques also are needed to determine the advantages and disadvantages of various noninvasive protocols to measure hepatic fibrosis. Because myocardial fibrosis and hepatic fibrosis are correlated, future studies that explore the relationships between hepatic fibrosis and CVD should account for myocardial fibrosis or systemic inflammatory or fibrotic processes to help elucidate the mechanisms that drive the association between the liver and cardiovascular systems.Ostovaneh et al33 have demonstrated that hepatic fibrosis can be measured in a cohort study; additional cohort studies should consider similar techniques to define hepatic fibrosis so that we can learn more about this important NAFLD phenotype. If hepatic steatohepatitis and hepatic fibrosis are associated with incident CVD outcomes, clinicians and public health experts must determine how to prevent the onset and progression of NAFLD.Sources of FundingDr Long is supported, in part, by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases K23 DK113252 and a grant from Echosens Corporation. Dr Benjamin is supported, in part, by 1R01HL128914 and 2R01 HL092577.DisclosuresNone.FootnotesThe opinions expressed in this article are not necessarily those of the editors or of the American Heart Association.Correspondence to Michelle T. Long, MD, Section of Gastroenterology, Boston University School of Medicine, 85 E Concord St, 7th Floor, Boston, MA 02118. E-mail [email protected]References1. Chalasani N, Younossi Z, Lavine JE, Charlton M, Cusi K, Rinella M, Harrison SA, Brunt EM, Sanyal AJ. The diagnosis and management of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: practice guidance from the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases.Hepatology. 2018; 67:328–357. doi: 10.1002/hep.29367.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar2. Brunt EM. Pathology of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease.Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2010; 7:195–203. doi: 10.1038/nrgastro.2010.21.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar3. Allen AM, Terry TM, Larson JJ, Coward A, Somers VK, Kamath PS. Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease incidence and impact on metabolic burden and death: a 20 year-community study [published online ahead of print September 23, 2017].Hepatology. doi: 10.1002/hep.29546. Available at http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/hep.29546/abstract.Google Scholar4. Kim SK, Choi YJ, Huh BW, Park SW, Lee EJ, Cho YW, Huh KB. Nonalcoholic Fatty liver disease is associated with increased carotid intima-media thickness only in type 2 diabetic subjects with insulin resistance.J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2014; 99:1879–1884. doi: 10.1210/jc.2013-4133.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar5. Bril F, Lomonaco R, Orsak B, Ortiz-Lopez C, Webb A, Tio F, Hecht J, Cusi K. Relationship between disease severity, hyperinsulinemia, and impaired insulin clearance in patients with nonalcoholic steatohepatitis.Hepatology. 2014; 59:2178–2187. doi: 10.1002/hep.26988.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar6. Kawano Y, Cohen DE. Mechanisms of hepatic triglyceride accumulation in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease.J Gastroenterol. 2013; 48:434–441. doi: 10.1007/s00535-013-0758-5.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar7. Petta S, Gastaldelli A, Rebelos E, Bugianesi E, Messa P, Miele L, Svegliati-Baroni G, Valenti L, Bonino F. Pathophysiology of non alcoholic fatty liver disease.Int J Mol Sci. 2016; 17:2082–2108.CrossrefGoogle Scholar8. Cusi K. Role of obesity and lipotoxicity in the development of nonalcoholic steatohepatitis: pathophysiology and clinical implications.Gastroenterology. 2012; 142:711.e6–725.e6. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2012.02.003.CrossrefGoogle Scholar9. Cetindağli I, Kara M, Tanoglu A, Ozalper V, Aribal S, Hancerli Y, Unal M, Ozari O, Hira S, Kaplan M, Yazgan Y. Evaluation of endothelial dysfunction in patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: association of selenoprotein P with carotid intima-media thickness and endothelium-dependent vasodilation.Clin Res Hepatol Gastroenterol. 2017; 41:516–524. doi: 10.1016/j.clinre.2017.01.005.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar10. Fan Y, Wei F, Zhou Y, Zhang H. Association of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease with impaired endothelial function by flow-mediated dilation: a meta-analysis.Hepatol Res. 2016; 46:E165–E173. doi: 10.1111/hepr.12554.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar11. Targher G, Marra F, Marchesini G. Increased risk of cardiovascular disease in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: causal effect or epiphenomenon?Diabetologia. 2008; 51:1947–1953. doi: 10.1007/s00125-008-1135-4.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar12. Ong JP, Pitts A, Younossi ZM. Increased overall mortality and liver-related mortality in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease.J Hepatol. 2008; 49:608–612. doi: 10.1016/j.jhep.2008.06.018.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar13. Kim D, Kim WR, Kim HJ, Therneau TM. Association between noninvasive fibrosis markers and mortality among adults with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease in the United States.Hepatology. 2013; 57:1357–1365. doi: 10.1002/hep.26156.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar14. Angulo P, Kleiner DE, Dam-Larsen S, Adams LA, Bjornsson ES, Charatcharoenwitthaya P, Mills PR, Keach JC, Lafferty HD, Stahler A, Haflidadottir S, Bendtsen F. Liver fibrosis, but no other histologic features, is associated with long-term outcomes of patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease.Gastroenterology. 2015; 149:389.e10–397.e10. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2015.04.043.CrossrefGoogle Scholar15. Ratziu V, Charlotte F, Heurtier A, Gombert S, Giral P, Bruckert E, Grimaldi A, Capron F, Poynard T; LIDO Study Group. Sampling variability of liver biopsy in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease.Gastroenterology. 2005; 128:1898–1906. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2005.03.084.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar16. Machado MV, Cortez-Pinto H. Non-invasive diagnosis of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. A critical appraisal.J Hepatol. 2013; 58:1007–1019. doi: 10.1016/j.jhep.2012.11.021.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar17. Angulo P, Hui JM, Marchesini G, Bugianesi E, George J, Farrell GC, Enders F, Saksena S, Burt AD, Bida JP, Lindor K, Sanderson SO, Lenzi M, Adams LA, Kench J, Therneau TM, Day CP. The NAFLD fibrosis score: a noninvasive system that identifies liver fibrosis in patients with NAFLD.Hepatology. 2007; 45:846–854. doi: 10.1002/hep.21496.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar18. Lichtinghagen R, Pietsch D, Bantel H, Manns MP, Brand K, Bahr MJ. The Enhanced Liver Fibrosis (ELF) score: normal values, influence factors and proposed cut-off values.J Hepatol. 2013; 59:236–242. doi: 10.1016/j.jhep.2013.03.016.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar19. Castera L. Noninvasive evaluation of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease.Semin Liver Dis. 2015; 35:291–303. doi: 10.1055/s-0035-1562948.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar20. Meffert PJ, Baumeister SE, Lerch MM, Mayerle J, Kratzer W, Völzke H. Development, external validation, and comparative assessment of a new diagnostic score for hepatic steatosis.Am J Gastroenterol. 2014; 109:1404–1414. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2014.155.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar21. Long MT, Pedley A, Massaro JM, Hoffmann U, Fox CS. The association between non-invasive hepatic fibrosis markers and cardiometabolic risk factors in the Framingham Heart Study.PLoS One. 2016; 11:e0157517. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0157517.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar22. Castera L, Vilgrain V, Angulo P. Noninvasive evaluation of NAFLD.Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2013; 10:666–675. doi: 10.1038/nrgastro.2013.175.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar23. Noureddin M, Lam J, Peterson MR, Middleton M, Hamilton G, Le TA, Bettencourt R, Changchien C, Brenner DA, Sirlin C, Loomba R. Utility of magnetic resonance imaging versus histology for quantifying changes in liver fat in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease trials.Hepatology. 2013; 58:1930–1940. doi: 10.1002/hep.26455.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar24. Loomba R. Role of imaging-based biomarkers in NAFLD: recent advances in clinical application and future research directions.J Hepatol. 2018; 68:296–304. doi: 10.1016/j.jhep.2017.11.028.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar25. Imajo K, Kessoku T, Honda Y, Tomeno W, Ogawa Y, Mawatari H, Fujita K, Yoneda M, Taguri M, Hyogo H, Sumida Y, Ono M, Eguchi Y, Inoue T, Yamanaka T, Wada K, Saito S, Nakajima A. Magnetic resonance imaging more accurately classifies steatosis and fibrosis in patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease than transient elastography.Gastroenterology. 2016; 150:626.e7–637.e7. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2015.11.048.CrossrefGoogle Scholar26. Caussy C, Chen J, Alquiraish MH, Cepin S, Nguyen P, Hernandez C, Yin M, Bettencourt R, Cachay ER, Jayakumar S, Fortney L, Hooker J, Sy E, Valasek MA, Rizo E, Richards L, Brenner D, Sirlin CB, Ehman RL,, Loomba R. Association between obesity and discordance in fibrosis stage determination by magnetic resonance vs transient elastography in patients with nonalcoholic liver disease.Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2018; 17:e31304–e31306.Google Scholar27. Dulai PS, Sirlin CB, Loomba R. MRI and MRE for non-invasive quantitative assessment of hepatic steatosis and fibrosis in NAFLD and NASH: clinical trials to clinical practice.J Hepatol. 2016; 65:1006–1016. doi: 10.1016/j.jhep.2016.06.005.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar28. Loomba R, Wolfson T, Ang B, Hooker J, Behling C, Peterson M, Valasek M, Lin G, Brenner D, Gamst A, Ehman R, Sirlin C. Magnetic resonance elastography predicts advanced fibrosis in patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: a prospective study.Hepatology. 2014; 60:1920–1928. doi: 10.1002/hep.27362.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar29. Tunnicliffe EM, Banerjee R, Pavlides M, Neubauer S, Robson MD. A model for hepatic fibrosis: the competing effects of cell loss and iron on shortened modified Look-Locker inversion recovery T1(shMOLLI-T1) in the liver.J Magn Reson Imaging. 2017; 45:450–462. doi: 10.1002/jmri.25392.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar30. Li Z, Sun J, Hu X, Huang N, Han G, Chen L, Zhou Y, Bai W, Yang X. Assessment of liver fibrosis by variable flip angle T1 mapping at 3.0T.J Magn Reson Imaging. 2016; 43:698–703. doi: 10.1002/jmri.25030.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar31. Pavlides M, Banerjee R, Sellwood J, Kelly CJ, Robson MD, Booth JC, Collier J, Neubauer S, Barnes E. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging predicts clinical outcomes in patients with chronic liver disease.J Hepatol. 2016; 64:308–315. doi: 10.1016/j.jhep.2015.10.009.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar32. Verloh N, Utpatel K, Haimerl M, Zeman F, Fellner C, Fichtner-Feigl S, Teufel A, Stroszczynski C, Evert M, Wiggermann P. Liver fibrosis and Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI: a histopathologic correlation.Sci Rep. 2015; 5:15408. doi: 10.1038/srep15408.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar33. Ostovaneh MR, Ambale-Venkatesh B, Fuji T, Bakhshi H, Shah R, Murthy VL, Tracy RP, Guallar E, Wu CO, Bluemke DA, Lima JAC. Association of liver fibrosis with cardiovascular diseases in the general population: The Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA). Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2018; 11:e007241. doi: 10.1161/CIRCIMAGING.117.007241.LinkGoogle Scholar34. Yu JS, Shim JH, Chung JJ, Kim JH, Kim KW. Double contrast-enhanced MRI of viral hepatitis-induced cirrhosis: correlation of gross morphological signs with hepatic fibrosis.Br J Radiol. 2010; 83:212–217. doi: 10.1259/bjr/70974553.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar Previous Back to top Next FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsCited ByMascherbauer K, Donà C, Koschutnik M, Dannenberg V, Nitsche C, Duca F, Heitzinger G, Halavina K, Steinacher E, Kronberger C, Bardach C, Beitzke D, Loewe C, Waldmann E, Trauner M, Bartko P, Goliasch G, Mascherbauer J, Hengstenberg C and Kammerlander A (2022) Hepatic T1-Time Predicts Cardiovascular Risk in All-Comers Referred for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance: A Post-Hoc Analysis, Circulation: Cardiovascular Imaging, 15:10, (e014716), Online publication date: 1-Oct-2022. Bardach C, Morski L, Mascherbauer K, Donà C, Koschutnik M, Halavina K, Nitsche C, Beitzke D, Loewe C, Waldmann E, Trauner M, Mascherbauer J, Hengstenberg C and Kammerlander A (2022) Comparison of Hepatic Tissue Characterization between T1-Mapping and Non-Contrast Computed Tomography, Journal of Clinical Medicine, 10.3390/jcm11102863, 11:10, (2863) Wang Q, Sheng Y, Du Y, Liu H, Zhu Z, Li Y, Zhang J and Xing W (2021) Gd-EOB-DTPA T1 Mapping with Extracellular Volume Fraction in Staging Liver Fibrosis: A Preclinical Investigation, Applied Magnetic Resonance, 10.1007/s00723-021-01337-y, 52:6, (677-689), Online publication date: 1-Jun-2021. March 2018Vol 11, Issue 3 Advertisement Article InformationMetrics © 2018 American Heart Association, Inc.https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCIMAGING.118.007553PMID: 29523556 Originally publishedMarch 9, 2018 Keywordsnon-alcoholic fatty liver diseaseEditorialstriglycerideslipogenesisinsulin resistancePDF download Advertisement SubjectsAtrial FibrillationCardiovascular DiseaseEpidemiologyHeart Failure
Referência(s)