Comparison of Fibroscan to Simple Noninvasive Screening Tools in Predicting Fibrosis in NAFLD Patients of Western India With High Risk of Liver Fibrosis

Parikh, Pathik; Dattatray, Solanke; Sawant, Prabha

doi:10.1016/j.cgh.2015.04.153

Cited by 4 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The articles were published between 2004 ( 123 ) and 2021 ( 29 , 33 , 153 ). The majority were cross-sectional (68%) ( 20–22 , 27–29 , 31–35 , 40–44 , 46–48 , 50–55 , 58 , 59 , 62 , 65 , 69 , 70 , 75 , 78 , 79 , 83 , 84 , 86 , 88 , 90–93 , 95 , 97–100 , 103–105 , 108 , 109 , 111–114 , 116 , 117 , 119–122 , 124 , 126–128 , 130–136 , 138 , 140–143 , 146 , 147 , 149–151 , 156 ). Regarding the type of publication, 70.3% of the studies were full-text articles ( 18 , 20 , 22 , 25 , 26 , 28–31 , 33 , 35 , 37 , 39–42 , 44–50 , 52 , 53 , 55 , 57 , 58 , 60 , 62 , 63 , 65 , 66 , 68 , 70 , 74 ...…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Regarding the type of publication, 70.3% of the studies were full-text articles ( 18 , 20 , 22 , 25 , 26 , 28–31 , 33 , 35 , 37 , 39–42 , 44–50 , 52 , 53 , 55 , 57 , 58 , 60 , 62 , 63 , 65 , 66 , 68 , 70 , 74 , 75 , 77–79 , 82–88 , 90–100 , 103 , 106 , 108 , 109 , 111–122 , 124 , 126 , 128 , 130–135 , 138 , 140–143 , 146 , 147 , 149–154 ), and the remaining 29.7% were conference abstracts ( 19 , 21 , 23 , 24 , 32 , 34 , 36 , 38 , 43 , 51 , 54 , 56 , 60 , 61 , 64 , 67 , 69 , 71–73 , 76 , 80 , 81 , 89 , 101 , 102 , 104 ,...…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The 138 included studies evaluated the nine serological biomarkers (FIB-4; FibroMeter; ELF; NFS; BARD; Hepascore; APRI; FibroTest; Forns score) for liver fibrosis. The most described was the FIB-4, in 89 studies ( 20–26 , 28 , 29 , 32 , 33 , 35 , 37 , 38 , 40 , 44 , 48 , 49 , 52 , 54–56 , 58 , 66 , 67 , 71–75 , 77–80 , 83–86 , 89–91 , 94 , 97–101 , 104–107 , 109 , 110 , 112–115 , 118 , 127–134 , 136 , 137 , 140 , 141 , 143–146 , 148–154 ), followed by the NFS score in 87 studies ( 22–27 , 30–38 , 41 , 42 , 47–49 , 51–56 , 58 , 61 , 66 , 67 , 71 , 73 , 74 , 76 , 77 , 80–84 , 86 , 90 , 95 , 97–101 , 104–107 , 110 , 111 , 113–119 , 121 , 124 , 125 , 127 , 129 ,…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The risk of bias was unclear in 41% of the studies regarding patient selection ( 18 , 19 , 21 , 22 , 24 , 31 , 36–38 , 51 , 56 , 59 , 61 , 72 , 73 , 76 , 83 , 85 , 88–90 , 94 , 105 , 107 , 111 , 119 , 120 , 125 , 139 , 142 , 148 , 152 , 155 , 157 ). Concerning the reference standard of the studies, several studies did not describe whether all patients received the reference standard and whether all patients were included in the studies, and therefore, 27% of the studies were unclear about the risk of bias ( 20 , 25 , 30 , 34 , 35 , 46 , 49 , 57 , 59 , 66 , 74 , 79 , 80 , 86 , 91 , 93 , 98 , 100 , 106–109 , 115 , 116 , 118 , 123 , 129 , 130 , 138 , 142–145 , 149 , 150 , 154 , 158 ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The stage system used to perform the biopsy in most studies was the Kleiner and Brunt system in 55% of the studies (19, 20, 22, 24, 26, 27, 31, 32, 35, 39, 42, 44-50, 52, 53, 56, 58-63, 65, 68, 70, 75, 76, 81-84, 86, 91, 94-100, 106, 107, 113, 114, 117, 119-124, 126, 128, 130-136, 138, 140-144, 149-153). Regarding the severity of fibrosis, AF was the most diagnosed, with 182 studies (20-26, 28, 29, 32, 33, 35, 37, 38, 40, 44, 48, 49, 52, 54-56, 58, 66, 67, 71-75, 77-80, 83-86, 89-91, 94, 97-101, 104-107, 109, 110, 112-115, 118, 127-134, 136, 137, 140, 141, 143-154), followed by SF, with 140 studies (22-25, 30, 35, 36, 38, 41, 42, 47-49, 51, 52, 54, 55, 58, 61, 71, 73, 74, 76, 77, 81-84, 86, 90, 95, 98-101, 105-107, 110, 113, 115, 116, 119, 121, 124, 127, 129, 131, 134-136, 138, 144, 147, 150-152), then by any type of liver fibrosis (107, 112, 114, 120-122, 124, 126, 132, 138, 140-143, 149-151, 153, 154) and cirrhosis (8,18,19,22,26,40,47,52,92,105,111,113,116,119,128,131,154) in 18 and 16 studies, respectively (Supplementary Text S2 and Supplementary Tables S2, S3). The serological biomarker cutoff values for each severity level have been described in more detail in (Supplementary Table S4).…”

Section: Serological Biomarkersmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Accuracy of prognostic serological biomarkers in predicting liver fibrosis severity in people with metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease: a meta-analysis of over 40,000 participants

López Tórrez,

Ayala,

Ruggiro

et al. 2024

Front. Nutr.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionA prognostic model to predict liver severity in people with metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) is very important, but the accuracy of the most commonly used tools is not yet well established.ObjectiveThe meta-analysis aimed to assess the accuracy of different prognostic serological biomarkers in predicting liver fibrosis severity in people with MASLD.MethodsAdults ≥18 years of age with MASLD were included, with the following: liver biopsy and aspartate aminotransferase-to-platelet ratio (APRI), fibrosis index-4 (FIB-4), non-alcoholic fatty liver disease fibrosis score (NFS), body mass index, aspartate aminotransferase/alanine aminotransferase ratio, diabetes score (BARD score), FibroMeter, FibroTest, enhanced liver fibrosis (ELF), Forns score, and Hepascore. Meta-analyses were performed using a random effects model based on the DerSimonian and Laird methods. The study’s risk of bias was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2.ResultsIn total, 138 articles were included, of which 86 studies with 46,514 participants met the criteria for the meta-analysis. The results for the summary area under the receiver operating characteristic (sAUROC) curve, according to the prognostic models, were as follows: APRI: advanced fibrosis (AF): 0.78, any fibrosis (AnF): 0.76, significant fibrosis (SF): 0.76, cirrhosis: 0.72; FIB-4: cirrhosis: 0.83, AF: 0.81, AnF: 0.77, SF: 0.75; NFS: SF: 0.81, AF: 0.81, AnF: 0.71, cirrhosis: 0.69; BARD score: SF: 0.77, AF: 0.73; FibroMeter: SF: 0.88, AF: 0.84; FibroTest: SF: 0.86, AF: 0.78; and ELF: AF: 0.87.ConclusionThe results of this meta-analysis suggest that, when comparing the scores of serological biomarkers with liver biopsies, the following models showed better diagnostic accuracy in predicting liver fibrosis severity in people with MASLD: FIB-4 for any fibrosis, FibroMeter for significant fibrosis, ELF for advanced fibrosis, and FIB-4 for cirrhosis.Clinical trial registration: [https://clinicaltrials.gov/], identifier [CRD 42020180525].

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Serological Biomarkersmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Accuracy of prognostic serological biomarkers in predicting liver fibrosis severity in people with metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease: a meta-analysis of over 40,000 participants

López Tórrez,

Ayala,

Ruggiro

et al. 2024

Front. Nutr.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Elastography in the Diagnosis of Non-Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Currently, there has been a progressive increase in prevalence of one of the most common diffuse chronic liver diseases ― non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). Assessment of the stages of liver fibrosis and steatosis is prognostically significant in diagnosis of NAFLD. Routine diagnostic methods are either not able to accurately assess the severity of fibrosis and steatosis (ultrasound, laboratory tests), or cannot be used as a simple screening tool (liver biopsy) due to such limitations as invasiveness, dependence on pathologist qualification, high cost, and limited region of interest. Over the last two decades, the great progress has been made in non-invasive visualization of pathological changes in liver diseases. In this review, we examined the diagnostic characteristics of the most widely used non-invasive imaging methods in clinical practice, available for quantitative determination of fat and fibrosis in the liver: transient elastography with controlled attenuation parameter (CAP), acoustic radiation force impulse (ARFI) and shear wave elastography (SWE). Comparing these methods and their limitations, we came to conclusion, that elastographic methods (slightly more ARFI and SWE) are able to verify the F3, F4 stages of fibrosis in NAFLD with high sensitivity and specificity (90%); however, they are less accurate for early stages. Elastographic techniques have moderate accuracy in identifying the degree of steatosis due to the lack of uniform standardized cut-off values of CAP.

show abstract

Study of Correlation between Fibroscan and Resistin Level in Non-Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease Patient

Soud

Dawood

El-Kashash

et al. 2021

The Egyptian Journal of Hospital Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Comparison of Fibroscan to Simple Noninvasive Screening Tools in Predicting Fibrosis in NAFLD Patients of Western India With High Risk of Liver Fibrosis

Cited by 4 publications

References 0 publications

Accuracy of prognostic serological biomarkers in predicting liver fibrosis severity in people with metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease: a meta-analysis of over 40,000 participants

Accuracy of prognostic serological biomarkers in predicting liver fibrosis severity in people with metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease: a meta-analysis of over 40,000 participants

Elastography in the Diagnosis of Non-Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease

Study of Correlation between Fibroscan and Resistin Level in Non-Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease Patient

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About