Jiulian Gu1,2, Shousheng Liu3,4, Shuixian Du1,5, Qing Zhang6, Jianhan Xiao2, Quanjiang Dong3, Yongning Xin7,8,9. 1. Department of Infectious Disease, Qingdao Municipal Hospital, Qingdao, 266011, China. 2. Medical College of Qingdao University, Qingdao, 266071, China. 3. Central Laboratories, Qingdao Municipal Hospital, Qingdao, 266071, China. 4. Digestive Disease Key Laboratory of Qingdao, Qingdao, 266071, China. 5. Department of Gastroenterology, Qingdao Municipal Hospital, 1 Jiaozhou Road, Qingdao, 266011, Shandong Province, China. 6. Department of Radiology, Qingdao Municipal Hospital, Qingdao, 266071, China. 7. Department of Infectious Disease, Qingdao Municipal Hospital, Qingdao, 266011, China. xinyongning@163.com. 8. Digestive Disease Key Laboratory of Qingdao, Qingdao, 266071, China. xinyongning@163.com. 9. Department of Gastroenterology, Qingdao Municipal Hospital, 1 Jiaozhou Road, Qingdao, 266011, Shandong Province, China. xinyongning@163.com.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To systematically review studies about the diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging proton density fat fraction (MRI-PDFF) in the classification of hepatic steatosis grade in patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). METHODS: Areas under the summary receiver operating characteristic curves (AUROC), sensitivity, specificity, overall diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), diagnostic score, positive likelihood ratio (+LR), and negative likelihood ratio (-LR) for MRI-PDFF in classification of steatosis grades 0 vs. 1-3, 0-1 vs. 2-3, and 0-2 vs. 3 were compared and analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 6 studies were included in this meta-analysis (n = 635). The summary AUROC values of MRI-PDFF for classifying steatosis grades 0 vs. 1-3, 0-1 vs. 2-3, and 0-2 vs. 3 were 0.98, 0.91, and 0.90, respectively. Pooled sensitivity and specificity of MRI-PDFF for classifying steatosis grades 0 vs. 1-3, 0-1 vs. 2-3, and 0-2 vs. 3 were 0.93 and 0.94, 0.74 and 0.90, and 0.74 and 0.87, respectively. Summary +LR and -LR of MRI-PDFF for classifying steatosis grades 0 vs. 1-3, 0-1 vs. 2-3, and 0-2 vs. 3 were 16.21 (95%CI, 4.72-55.67) and 0.08 (95%CI, 0.04-0.15), 7.19 (95%CI, 5.04-10.26) and 0.29 (95%CI, 0.22-0.38), and 5.89 (95%CI, 4.27-8.13) and 0.29 (95%CI, 0.21-0.41), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our meta-analysis suggests that MRI-PDFF has excellent diagnostic value for assessment of hepatic fat content and classification of histologic steatosis in patients with NAFLD. KEY POINTS: • MRI-PDFF has significant diagnostic value for hepatic steatosis in patients with NAFLD. • MRI-PDFF may be used to classify grade of hepatic steatosis with high sensitivity and specificity.
OBJECTIVE: To systematically review studies about the diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging proton density fat fraction (MRI-PDFF) in the classification of hepatic steatosis grade in patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). METHODS: Areas under the summary receiver operating characteristic curves (AUROC), sensitivity, specificity, overall diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), diagnostic score, positive likelihood ratio (+LR), and negative likelihood ratio (-LR) for MRI-PDFF in classification of steatosis grades 0 vs. 1-3, 0-1 vs. 2-3, and 0-2 vs. 3 were compared and analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 6 studies were included in this meta-analysis (n = 635). The summary AUROC values of MRI-PDFF for classifying steatosis grades 0 vs. 1-3, 0-1 vs. 2-3, and 0-2 vs. 3 were 0.98, 0.91, and 0.90, respectively. Pooled sensitivity and specificity of MRI-PDFF for classifying steatosis grades 0 vs. 1-3, 0-1 vs. 2-3, and 0-2 vs. 3 were 0.93 and 0.94, 0.74 and 0.90, and 0.74 and 0.87, respectively. Summary +LR and -LR of MRI-PDFF for classifying steatosis grades 0 vs. 1-3, 0-1 vs. 2-3, and 0-2 vs. 3 were 16.21 (95%CI, 4.72-55.67) and 0.08 (95%CI, 0.04-0.15), 7.19 (95%CI, 5.04-10.26) and 0.29 (95%CI, 0.22-0.38), and 5.89 (95%CI, 4.27-8.13) and 0.29 (95%CI, 0.21-0.41), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our meta-analysis suggests that MRI-PDFF has excellent diagnostic value for assessment of hepatic fat content and classification of histologic steatosis in patients with NAFLD. KEY POINTS: • MRI-PDFF has significant diagnostic value for hepatic steatosis in patients with NAFLD. • MRI-PDFF may be used to classify grade of hepatic steatosis with high sensitivity and specificity.
Entities:
Keywords:
Magnetic resonance imaging; Meta-analysis; NAFLD
Authors: N Y Yu; T Wolfson; M S Middleton; G Hamilton; A Gamst; J E Angeles; J B Schwimmer; C B Sirlin Journal: Clin Radiol Date: 2017-01-05 Impact factor: 2.350
Authors: Luis Fernández-Salazar; Benito Velayos; Rocío Aller; Félix Lozano; José A Garrote; José M González Journal: Scand J Gastroenterol Date: 2011-03-02 Impact factor: 2.423
Authors: Stuart McPherson; Julie R Jonsson; Gary J Cowin; Peter O'Rourke; Andrew D Clouston; Andrew Volp; Leigh Horsfall; Dinesh Jothimani; Jonathan Fawcett; Graham J Galloway; Mark Benson; Elizabeth E Powell Journal: J Hepatol Date: 2009-05-18 Impact factor: 25.083
Authors: Jie Chen; Alina M Allen; Terry M Therneau; Jun Chen; Jiahui Li; Safa Hoodeshenas; Jingbiao Chen; Xin Lu; Zheng Zhu; Sudhakar K Venkatesh; Bin Song; Richard L Ehman; Meng Yin Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2021-08-25 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Stephan C Bischoff; Rocco Barazzoni; Luca Busetto; Marjo Campmans-Kuijpers; Vincenzo Cardinale; Irit Chermesh; Ahad Eshraghian; Haluk Tarik Kani; Wafaa Khannoussi; Laurence Lacaze; Miguel Léon-Sanz; Juan M Mendive; Michael W Müller; Johann Ockenga; Frank Tacke; Anders Thorell; Darija Vranesic Bender; Arved Weimann; Cristina Cuerda Journal: United European Gastroenterol J Date: 2022-08-12 Impact factor: 6.866
Authors: Marianna K Baum; Javier A Tamargo; Richard L Ehman; Kenneth E Sherman; Jun Chen; Qingyun Liu; Raul N Mandler; Colby Teeman; Sabrina S Martinez; Adriana Campa Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2021-01-19 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Houchun H Hu; Takeshi Yokoo; Mustafa R Bashir; Claude B Sirlin; Diego Hernando; Dariya Malyarenko; Thomas L Chenevert; Mark A Smith; Suraj D Serai; Michael S Middleton; Walter C Henderson; Gavin Hamilton; Jean Shaffer; Yunhong Shu; Jean A Tkach; Andrew T Trout; Nancy Obuchowski; Jean H Brittain; Edward F Jackson; Scott B Reeder Journal: Radiology Date: 2021-01-19 Impact factor: 11.105