Table 2.

Ezetimibe plus rosuvastatin versus rosuvastatin monotherapy: longitudinal changes in liver fat and liver fibrosis

		Ezetimibe + rosuvastatin (n = 31)			Rosuvastatin alone (n = 33)		Difference between groups
Liver segment	Baseline	Post-treatment	p-value	Baseline	Post-treatment	p-value	p-value
I	16.6 (8.2)	11.3 (6.4)	< 0.001	13.2 (7.3)	11.5 (7.0)	0.042	0.012
II	16.7 (8.4)	10.8 (6.0)	< 0.001	14.2 (7.4)	11.8 (7.4)	0.006	0.012
III	17.1 (8.3)	11.2 (6.6)	< 0.001	14.2 (7.6)	11.9 (7.2)	0.012	0.011
IV (A)	18.0 (8.4)	12.4 (6.7)	< 0.001	15.3 (7.9)	12.5 (7.5)	0.004	0.038
IV (B)	18.9 (8.8)	13.4 (7.5)	< 0.001	15.9 (7.3)	13.2 (7.8)	0.003	0.051
V	18.9 (8.7)	12.9 (6.7)	< 0.001	16.1 (7.6)	13.2 (7.8)	0.002	0.029
VI	18.1 (8.3)	12.4 (6.7)	< 0.001	14.5 (7.5)	11.7 (7.6)	0.001	0.039
VII	18.6 (7.9)	12.5 (6.5)	< 0.001	15.2 (7.2)	12.4 (7.3)	0.001	0.018
VIII	19.6 (8.5)	13.5 (7.2)	< 0.001	16.6 (7.4)	13.6 (7.9)	0.002	0.028
MRI-PDFF average, %	18.1 (8.2)	12.3 (6.4)	< 0.001	15.0 (7.3)	12.4 (7.4)	0.003	0.020
MRE, kPa	2.0 (0.5)	2.1 (0.5)	0.507	2.2 (0.4)	2.2 (0.7)	0.539	0.898

Magnetic resonance imaging proton density fat fraction (MRI-PDFF) with colocalized MRI measurements was used in the longitudinal liver fat mapping. Longitudinal changes in liver fibrosis were measured using magnetic resonance elastography (MRE). Data are expressed as mean (SD) or difference with p-values from paired t-test or per-protocol analysis

Abbreviations: MRI-PDFF magnetic resonance imaging proton density fat fraction, MRE magnetic resonance elastography