• Clin. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. · Mar 2019

    Meta Analysis Comparative Study

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

    • 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, and Rohit Loomba.
    • Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease Research Center, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California.
    • Clin. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 2019 Mar 1; 17 (4): 630-637.e8.

    Background & AimsMagnetic resonance elastography (MRE) and transient elastography (TE) are noninvasive techniques for detection of liver fibrosis. Single-center studies have compared the diagnostic performance of MRE vs TE in patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). We conducted a pooled analysis of individual participant data from published studies to compare the diagnostic performance of MRE vs TE for staging of liver fibrosis in patients with NAFLD, using liver biopsy as reference.MethodsWe performed a systematic search of publication databases, from 2005 through 2017. We identified 3 studies of adults with NAFLD who were assessed by MRE, TE, and liver biopsy. In a pooled analysis, we calculated the cluster-adjusted area under the curve (AUROC) of MRE and TE for the detection of each stage of fibrosis. AUROC comparisons between MRE and TE were performed using the Delong test.ResultsOur pooled analysis included 230 participants with biopsy-proven NAFLD with mean age of 52.2±13.9 years and a body mass index of 31.9±7.5 kg/m2. The proportions of patients with fibrosis of stages 0, 1, 2, 3, and 4 were: 31.7%, 27.8%, 15.7%, 13.9%, and 10.9%, respectively. The AUROC of TE vs MRE for detection of fibrosis stages ≥1 was 0.82 (95% CI, 0.76-0.88) vs 0.87 (95% CI, 0.82-0.91) (P=.04); for stage≥ 2 was 0.87 (95% CI, 0.82-0.91) vs 0.92 (95% CI, 0.88-0.96) (P=.03); for stage ≥3 was 0.84 (95% CI, 0.78-0.90) vs 0.93 (95% CI, 0.89-0.96) (P=.001); for stage ≥ 4 was 0.84 (95% CI, 0.73-0.94) vs 0.94 (95% CI, 0.89-0.99) (P=.005).ConclusionIn a pooled analysis of data from individual participants with biopsy-proven NAFLD, we found MRE to have a statistically significantly higher diagnostic accuracy than TE in detection of each stage of fibrosis. MRE and TE each have roles in detection of fibrosis in patients with NAFLD, depending upon the level of accuracy desired.Copyright © 2019 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.