Literature DB >> 22278368

Performance of magnetic resonance elastography and diffusion-weighted imaging for the staging of hepatic fibrosis: A meta-analysis.

Qing-Bing Wang1, Hui Zhu, Hai-Ling Liu, Bei Zhang.   

Abstract

UNLABELLED: A meta-analysis was performed to assess and compare the accuracies of magnetic resonance elastography (MRE) and diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) for the staging of hepatic fibrosis. Online journal databases and a manual search from January 2000 to May 2011 were used. We identified 41 studies, but only 14 met the criteria to perform a meta-analysis assessing MRE (five trials) or DWI (10 trials). Fibrosis was categorized by redistribution into five stages according to histopathological description. A bivariate binomial model was used to combine the sensitivity and specificity and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs), from which diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), and summary receiver operating characteristic (sROC) were derived to indicate the diagnostic accuracy of imaging modalities. With MRE, the sensitivity, specificity, DOR, PLR, NLR, and area under sROC curve (with 95% CIs) for staging F0 ∼ F1 versus F2 ∼ F4 and F0 ∼ F2 versus F3 ∼ F4 were 0.94 (0.81-0.98), 0.95 (0.87-0.98), 20 (7-57), 0.06 (0.02-0.22), 317 (55-1,796), 0.98 (0.97-0.99) and 0.92 (0.85-0.96), 0.96 (0.91-0.98), 21 (10-45), 0.08 (0.04-0.16), 251 (103-609), and 0.98 (0.96-0.99), respectively; and with DWI, these values were 0.77 (0.71-0.82), 0.78 (0.69-0.85), 3 (2-5), 0.30 (0.22-0.40), 12 (6-21), 0.83 (0.79-0.86) and 0.72 (0.60-0.81), 0.84 (0.77-0.89), 5 (3-7), 0.34 (0.23-0.50), 13 (6-29), and 0.86 (0.83-0.89), respectively. A z test demonstrated that MRE had a significantly higher accuracy than DWI in those indicators (P < 0.05).
CONCLUSION: MRE is more reliable for staging hepatic fibrosis, compared with DWI, with a high combination of sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios, DOR, and area under sROC curve.
Copyright © 2012 American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22278368     DOI: 10.1002/hep.25610

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hepatology        ISSN: 0270-9139            Impact factor:   17.425


  83 in total

Review 1.  Cirrhosis in hepatitis C virus-infected patients: a review for practitioners new to hepatitis C care.

Authors:  Andrew J Muir
Journal:  Top Antivir Med       Date:  2014 Sep-Oct

2.  Shear-wave elastography for the estimation of liver fibrosis in chronic liver disease: determining accuracy and ideal site for measurement.

Authors:  Anthony E Samir; Manish Dhyani; Abhinav Vij; Atul K Bhan; Elkan F Halpern; Jorge Méndez-Navarro; Kathleen E Corey; Raymond T Chung
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2014-11-13       Impact factor: 11.105

Review 3.  Prediction of liver cirrhosis, using diagnostic imaging tools.

Authors:  Suk Keu Yeom; Chang Hee Lee; Sang Hoon Cha; Cheol Min Park
Journal:  World J Hepatol       Date:  2015-08-18

Review 4.  Four-dimensional flow magnetic resonance imaging in cirrhosis.

Authors:  Zoran Stankovic
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2016-01-07       Impact factor: 5.742

5.  Noninvasive assessment of liver fibrosis using ultrasound-based shear wave measurement and comparison to magnetic resonance elastography.

Authors:  Heng Zhao; Jun Chen; Duane D Meixner; Hua Xie; Vijay Shamdasani; Shiwei Zhou; Jean-Luc Robert; Matthew W Urban; William Sanchez; Matthew R Callstrom; Richard L Ehman; James F Greenleaf; Shigao Chen
Journal:  J Ultrasound Med       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 2.153

6.  Multiparametric CT for Noninvasive Staging of Hepatitis C Virus-Related Liver Fibrosis: Correlation With the Histopathologic Fibrosis Score.

Authors:  Perry J Pickhardt; Peter M Graffy; Adnan Said; Daniel Jones; Brandon Welsh; Ryan Zea; Meghan G Lubner
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2019-01-15       Impact factor: 3.959

Review 7.  Putting it all together: established and emerging MRI techniques for detecting and measuring liver fibrosis.

Authors:  Suraj D Serai; Andrew T Trout; Alexander Miethke; Eric Diaz; Stavra A Xanthakos; Jonathan R Dillman
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2018-08-04

8.  Diffusion kurtosis imaging in the assessment of liver function: Its potential as an effective predictor of liver function.

Authors:  Daisuke Yoshimaru; Yasuo Takatsu; Yuichi Suzuki; Toshiaki Miyati; Yuhki Hamada; Ayumu Funaki; Ayumi Tabata; Chifumi Maruyama; Masahiko Shimada; Maki Tobari; Takayoshi Nishino
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2018-11-01       Impact factor: 3.039

9.  Magnetic Resonance vs Transient Elastography Analysis of Patients With Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease: A Systematic Review and Pooled Analysis of Individual Participants.

Authors:  Cynthia Hsu; Cyrielle Caussy; Kento Imajo; Jun Chen; Siddharth Singh; Kellee Kaulback; Minh-Da Le; Jonathan Hooker; Xin Tu; Ricki Bettencourt; Meng Yin; Claude B Sirlin; Richard L Ehman; Atsushi Nakajima; Rohit Loomba
Journal:  Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2018-06-14       Impact factor: 11.382

Review 10.  Magnetic Resonance Elastography of Liver: Current Update.

Authors:  Safa Hoodeshenas; Meng Yin; Sudhakar Kundapur Venkatesh
Journal:  Top Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2018-10
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.