There are a few things that I don’t understand about Fibroscan CAP scores.
I have looked at the NICE 49 full guideline which can be found here:
nice.org.uk/guidance/ng49/e...
Fibroscan CAP scores are discussed in detail on pages 62 to 74; the CAP scores summary is based on 5 studies. This colour coded chart from an organisation providing Fibroscans in the UK appears to contain similar CAP ranges to what is discussed in the NICE guidelines:
tawazunhealth.com/fibroscan...
There are a few things that I do not fully understand.
A Fibroscanner appears to calculate values between 100 db/M (decibels per meter) and 400 db/M. As far as I can tell this range refers to the sonic range of the equipment rather than to a reference range that for example is quoted in blood test results; for example the local pathology gives a reference range for B12 as being between 197 ng/L and 711 ng/L.
A normal healthy liver is said to have < 5% fat. If you did a set of Fibroscan tests on a cohort of young healthy children, would you expect their CAP score to be around 100?
The steatosis grade S0 which is colour coded as green has a range of 150 - 248 db/M indicating < 10% fat. Why does the range start at 150 rather than 100? Why is the range so large in comparison with the S1 and S2 ranges?
The steatosis grades S1, S2 and S3 are respectively 248 - 260, 260 - 280 and > 280 which correspond to far ranges of 11% - 33%, 34% - 66% and > 67%. The S1 and S2 bands are tiny ranges.
The liver is a large organ and I'm not sure that the scanner can scan the whole liver? I suspect that someone who has a CAP score of 247 could easily be rescanned and have a score of 261 which could mean that nearly 50% of the liver is fatty.
Are there many people here who have a CAP score over 280?
I got my diagnosis of NALFD from a small bowel MRI scan which states that I have "generalised hepatic steatosis". I've also got too much fat in my pancreas (from a gallbladder/pancreas MRI). I've severe BAM (Bile Acid Malabsorption); people with BAM invariably have NAFLD. It's a pity that MRI scanners cannot estimate fat levels.