Minireviews
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2022.
World J Gastroenterol. Jul 21, 2022; 28(27): 3398-3409
Published online Jul 21, 2022. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v28.i27.3398
Table 1 Studies using artificial intelligence based on ultrasound for fatty liver disease diagnosis
Task
Reference standard
Sample size
Method
Results
Ref.
Fatty liver disease diagnosisLiver biopsy55 patients with severe obesity, 38 of whom had fatty liver diseaseDeep learning with B-mode image ultrasoundSensitivity: 100%; specificity: 88%; accuracy: 96%; AUC: 0.98[26]
Fatty liver disease diagnosisRadiologist qualitative score157 ultrasound liver images from unknown number of participantsDeep learning with B-mode image ultrasound Sensitivity: 95%; specificity: 85%; accuracy: 90.6%; AUC: 0.96[28]
NAFLD assessmentMRI proton density fat fraction204 participants, 140 of whom had NAFLD, 64 control participants One-dimensional CNNsSensitivity: 97%; specificity: 94%; accuracy: 96%; AUC: 0.98[31]
NAFLD assessmentMRI proton density fat fraction135 adult participants with known or suspected NAFLD Transfer learning with a pretrained CNN by four ultrasound views of liver routinely obtainedSCC: 0.81; AUC: 0.91 (PDFF ≥ 5%)[27]
NAFLD assessmentLiver biopsy295 subjects, 198 mild fatty liver, one moderate degree of fatty liverDCNN-based organ segmentation with Gaussian mixture modeling for automated quantification of the HRIICC of two radiologists and DCNN were 0.919, 0.916, 0.734[33]
The severity of fatty liverAbdominal ultrasound21855 B-mode ultrasound images, 2070 patients with different severities from none to severe fatty liverPretrained CNN models with B-mode ultrasound imagesThe areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves were 0.974 (mild steatosis vs others), 0.971 (moderate steatosis vs others), 0.981 (severe steatosis vs others), 0.985 (any severity vs normal) and 0.996 (moderate-to-severe steatosis clinically abnormal vs normal-to-mild steatosis clinically normal)[29]