Review
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2023.
World J Hepatol. May 27, 2023; 15(5): 609-640
Published online May 27, 2023. doi: 10.4254/wjh.v15.i5.609
Table 6 Imaging biomarkers for the detection of nonalcoholic steatohepatitis and the detection of fibrosis in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease
Ref.
Marker
Country
Categories Tested
Sample size (n)
Dx
Cutoff
AUROC (95%CI)
Sens (%)
Spec (%)
PPV (%)
NPV (%)
P value
Yang et al[106], 2022CAP [dB/m]ChinaPredicting NASH in children with obesityNAFLD (n = 61), Non-NAFLD (n = 59), NAFL (n = 44), NASH (n = 17)US> 2760.722 (0.602-0.843)70.672.80.0058
Chaidez et al[105], 2022LSMUnited StatesF0-F2 vs F3-F6 (Ishak)Total (n = 206)Biopsy0.73 (0.64-0.81)
Chaidez et al[105], 2022LSMUnited StatesF0-F2 vs F3-F6 (Ishak)NAFLD (n = 116)Biopsy0.77 (0.67-0.88)
Chaidez et al[105], 2022LSMUnited StatesF0-F2 vs F3-F6 (Ishak)Non-NAFLD (n = 90)Biopsy0.70 (0.56-0.83)
Yang et al[106], 2022LSM [kPa]ChinaPredicting NASH in children with obesityNAFLD (n = 61), Non-NAFLD (n = 59), NAFL (n = 44), NASH (n = 17)US> 5.150.725 (0.611-0.839)64.7650.0048
Xanthakos et al[132], 2014MRE [kPa]United StatesF2-F4 vs F0-F1Chronic liver disease (n = 35; 27 with NAFLD); F0-F1 (n = 27), F2-F4 (n = 8)Biopsy2.710.92 (0.79-1.00)88850.02
Schwimmer et al[133], 2017MRE [kPa]United StatesAny Fibrosis (F0 vs F1-4)F0 (n = 54), F1 (n = 24), F2 (n = 6), F3 (n = 5), F4 (n = 1)Biopsy≥ 2.770.7744.490.776.271
Schwimmer et al[133], 2017MRE [kPa]United StatesAny Fibrosis (F0 vs F1-4)F0 (n = 54), F1 (n = 24), F2 (n = 6), F3 (n = 5), F4 (n = 1)Biopsy≥ 2.690.7947.288.973.971.6
Schwimmer et al[133], 2017MRE [kPa]United StatesAny Fibrosis (F0 vs F1-4)F0 (n = 54), F1 (n = 24), F2 (n = 6), F3 (n = 5), F4 (n = 1)Biopsy≥ 2.780.77244.490.776.271
Schwimmer et al[133], 2017MRE [kPa]United StatesAdvanced Fibrosis (F0-2 vs F3-4)F0 (n = 54), F1 (n = 24), F2 (n = 6), F3 (n = 5), F4 (n = 1)Biopsy≥ 3.050.925 (0.539-0.989)5091.73096.2
Schwimmer et al[133], 2017MRE [kPa]United StatesAdvanced Fibrosis (F0-2 vs F3-4)F0 (n = 54), F1 (n = 24), F2 (n = 6), F3 (n = 5), F4 (n = 1)Biopsy≥ 3.030.879 (0.539-0.898)33.39428.695.2
Schwimmer et al[133], 2017MRE [kPa]United StatesAdvanced Fibrosis (F0-2 vs F3-4)F0 (n = 54), F1 (n = 24), F2 (n = 6), F3 (n = 5), F4 (n = 1)Biopsy≥ 3.330.894 (0.682-0.959)33.390.52095
Trout et al[134], 2018MRE [kPa]United StatesLudwig stage 0-1 vs ≥ stage 2 fibrosis in total cohortTotal (n = 86; 48 with NAFLD), Ludwig ≥ stage 2 (n = 51), steatosis (n = 44)Biopsy2.270.70 (0.59-0.81)68.674.3
Trout et al[134], 2018MRE [kPa]United StatesLudwig stage 0-1 vs ≥ stage 2 fibrosis in total cohortTotal (n = 86; 48 with NAFLD), Ludwig ≥ stage 2 (n = 51), steatosis (n = 44)Biopsy1.6735.391.4
Trout et al[134], 2018MRE [kPa]United StatesLudwig stage 0-2 from ≥ stage 3 fibrosisTotal (n = 86; 48 with NAFLD), Ludwig ≥ stage 2 (n = 51), steatosis (n = 44)Biopsy6.550.90 (0.83-0.97)85.777.8
Trout et al[134], 2018MRE [kPa]United StatesLudwig stage 0-2 from ≥ stage 3 fibrosisTotal (n = 86; 48 with NAFLD), Ludwig ≥ stage 2 (n = 51), steatosis (n = 44)Biopsy5.4164.393.1
Trout et al[134], 2018MRE [kPa]United StatesLudwig stage 0-1 vs ≥ stage 2 fibrosis in patients with steatosis (n = 41)Total (n = 86; 48 with NAFLD), Ludwig ≥ stage 2 (n = 51), steatosis (n = 44)Biopsy0.53 (0.35-0.71)
Trout et al[134], 2018MRE [kPa]United StatesLudwig stage 0-1 vs ≥ stage 2 fibrosis in patients without steatosis (n = 45)Total (n = 86; 48 with NAFLD), Ludwig ≥ stage 2 (n = 51), steatosis (n = 44)Biopsy0.82 (0.67-0.96)
Alkhouri et al[108], 2012PNFIItaly≥ F2F0-F1 (n = 57), F2-F3 (n = 10)Biopsy8.20.747 (0.632-0.820)0.005
Nobili et al[107], 2008TE [kPa]Italy≥ F1F0 (n = 11), F1 (n = 27), F2 (n = 7), F3-4 (n = 5)Biopsy5.10.97 (0.90-0.99)97919791
Nobili et al[107], 2008TE [kPa]Italy≥ F2F0 (n = 11), F1 (n = 27), F2 (n = 7), F3-4 (n = 5)Biopsy7.40.99 (0.92-0.99)1009280100
Nobili et al[107], 2008TE [kPa]Italy≥ F3F0 (n = 11), F1 (n = 27), F2 (n = 7), F3-4 (n = 5)Biopsy10.21.00 (0.94-1.00)100100100100
Alkhouri et al[108], 2012TE [kPa]Italy≥ F2F0-F1 (n = 57), F2-F3 (n = 10)Biopsy8.61.00 (0.981-1.00)