Systematic Reviews
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2025.
World J Hepatol. Feb 27, 2025; 17(2): 100033
Published online Feb 27, 2025. doi: 10.4254/wjh.v17.i2.100033
Table 11 Diagnostic efficacy of ultrasound techniques (area under the receiver operating characteristic curves for steatosis detection)
Ref.
Number of patients
Disease
Diagnostic method
Steatosis stage
AUROC (CI)
Assessment
Nogami et al[36]163NAFLDVCTE (CAP)≥ S10.89 (0.73-0.95)Good
S20.77 (0.82-0.82)Acceptable
S30.69 (0.75-0.75)Unacceptable
Liu et al[59]100NAFLDATIS ≥ 10.762Acceptable
S ≥ 20.774Acceptable
S ≥ 30.784Acceptable
SWES ≥ 10.764Acceptable
S ≥ 20.783Acceptable
S ≥ 30.802Good
Qu et al[60]237NAFLDUAPS10.88Good
S20.93Excellent
S30.88Good
Zhao et al[65]34MAFLDNLVS ≥ 10.875 (0.716-0.963)Good
S ≥ 20.735 (0.556-0.871)Acceptable
S ≥ 30.583 (0.402-0.749)Unacceptable
NLV-SDS ≥ 10.900 (0.748-0.976)Good
S ≥ 20.745 (0.567-0.878)Acceptable
S ≥ 30.603 (0.422-0.766)Unacceptable
Kjaergaard et al[57]137ALD/NAFLDB-mode ratioS ≥ 10.79 (0.70-0.88)Acceptable
S ≥ 20.76 (0.66-0.85)Acceptable
S ≥ 30.74 (0.62-0.86)Acceptable
Zhou et al[64]139NAFLD2D-SWESteatohepatitis0.88Good
Yazdani et al[61]49NAFLDSWAS0 vs ≥ S10.99Excellent
≤ S1 vs ≥ S20.98Excellent
≤ S2 vs S30.93Excellent
Yu et al[62]85MAFLDCAP (FibroTouch)S ≥ S10.84 (0.67-1.01)Good
S ≥ S20.88 (0.81-0.95)Good
S = S30.89 (0.82-0.95)Good
Hsu et al[56]28CLDATIS ≥ 10.97 (0.83-1.00)Acceptable
S ≥ 20.99 (0.86-1.00)Acceptable
S = 30.97 (0.82-1.00)Acceptable
Kim et al[67]60NASHHRI≥ S20.871 (0.783-0.956)Good
≥ S30.851 (0.735-0.930)Good
Kuroda et al[58]202NAFLD2D-SWE + UGAP≥ S10.89 (P < 0.05)Good
≥ S20.91 (P < 0.05)Excellent
S30.92 (P < 0.05)Excellent
Welman et al[63]76Not specified or mixedATIS1-S30.85 (0.75-0.91)Good
S2-S30.91 (0.83-0.99)Excellent
S0-S1 vs
S2-S3
0.89 (0.65-0.98)Good