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
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] | 163 | NAFLD | VCTE (CAP) | ≥ S1 | 0.89 (0.73-0.95) | Good |
S2 | 0.77 (0.82-0.82) | Acceptable | ||||
S3 | 0.69 (0.75-0.75) | Unacceptable | ||||
Liu et al[59] | 100 | NAFLD | ATI | S ≥ 1 | 0.762 | Acceptable |
S ≥ 2 | 0.774 | Acceptable | ||||
S ≥ 3 | 0.784 | Acceptable | ||||
SWE | S ≥ 1 | 0.764 | Acceptable | |||
S ≥ 2 | 0.783 | Acceptable | ||||
S ≥ 3 | 0.802 | Good | ||||
Qu et al[60] | 237 | NAFLD | UAP | S1 | 0.88 | Good |
S2 | 0.93 | Excellent | ||||
S3 | 0.88 | Good | ||||
Zhao et al[65] | 34 | MAFLD | NLV | S ≥ 1 | 0.875 (0.716-0.963) | Good |
S ≥ 2 | 0.735 (0.556-0.871) | Acceptable | ||||
S ≥ 3 | 0.583 (0.402-0.749) | Unacceptable | ||||
NLV-SD | S ≥ 1 | 0.900 (0.748-0.976) | Good | |||
S ≥ 2 | 0.745 (0.567-0.878) | Acceptable | ||||
S ≥ 3 | 0.603 (0.422-0.766) | Unacceptable | ||||
Kjaergaard et al[57] | 137 | ALD/NAFLD | B-mode ratio | S ≥ 1 | 0.79 (0.70-0.88) | Acceptable |
S ≥ 2 | 0.76 (0.66-0.85) | Acceptable | ||||
S ≥ 3 | 0.74 (0.62-0.86) | Acceptable | ||||
Zhou et al[64] | 139 | NAFLD | 2D-SWE | Steatohepatitis | 0.88 | Good |
Yazdani et al[61] | 49 | NAFLD | SWA | S0 vs ≥ S1 | 0.99 | Excellent |
≤ S1 vs ≥ S2 | 0.98 | Excellent | ||||
≤ S2 vs S3 | 0.93 | Excellent | ||||
Yu et al[62] | 85 | MAFLD | CAP (FibroTouch) | S ≥ S1 | 0.84 (0.67-1.01) | Good |
S ≥ S2 | 0.88 (0.81-0.95) | Good | ||||
S = S3 | 0.89 (0.82-0.95) | Good | ||||
Hsu et al[56] | 28 | CLD | ATI | S ≥ 1 | 0.97 (0.83-1.00) | Acceptable |
S ≥ 2 | 0.99 (0.86-1.00) | Acceptable | ||||
S = 3 | 0.97 (0.82-1.00) | Acceptable | ||||
Kim et al[67] | 60 | NASH | HRI | ≥ S2 | 0.871 (0.783-0.956) | Good |
≥ S3 | 0.851 (0.735-0.930) | Good | ||||
Kuroda et al[58] | 202 | NAFLD | 2D-SWE + UGAP | ≥ S1 | 0.89 (P < 0.05) | Good |
≥ S2 | 0.91 (P < 0.05) | Excellent | ||||
S3 | 0.92 (P < 0.05) | Excellent | ||||
Welman et al[63] | 76 | Not specified or mixed | ATI | S1-S3 | 0.85 (0.75-0.91) | Good |
S2-S3 | 0.91 (0.83-0.99) | Excellent | ||||
S0-S1 vs S2-S3 | 0.89 (0.65-0.98) | Good |
- Citation: Pozowski P, Bilski M, Bedrylo M, Sitny P, Zaleska-Dorobisz U. Modern ultrasound techniques for diagnosing liver steatosis and fibrosis: A systematic review with a focus on biopsy comparison. World J Hepatol 2025; 17(2): 100033
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1948-5182/full/v17/i2/100033.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4254/wjh.v17.i2.100033