Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2011 Jan;21(1):87-97.
doi: 10.1007/s00330-010-1905-5. Epub 2010 Jul 31.

The diagnostic accuracy of US, CT, MRI and 1H-MRS for the evaluation of hepatic steatosis compared with liver biopsy: a meta-analysis

Anneloes E Bohte  1 , Jochem R van Werven, Shandra Bipat, Jaap Stoker
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

The diagnostic accuracy of US, CT, MRI and 1H-MRS for the evaluation of hepatic steatosis compared with liver biopsy: a meta-analysis

Anneloes E Bohte et al. Eur Radiol. 2011 Jan.

Abstract

Objective: To meta-analyse the diagnostic accuracy of US, CT, MRI and 1H-MRS for the evaluation of hepatic steatosis.

Methods: From a comprehensive literature search in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and Cochrane (up to November 2009), articles were selected that investigated the diagnostic performance imaging techniques for evaluating hepatic steatosis with histopathology as the reference standard. Cut-off values for the presence of steatosis on liver biopsy were subdivided into four groups: (1) >0, >2 and >5% steatosis; (2) >10, >15 and >20%; (3) >25, >30 and >33%; (4) >50, >60 and >66%. Per group, summary estimates for sensitivity and specificity were calculated. The natural-logarithm of the diagnostic odds ratio (lnDOR) was used as a single indicator of test performance.

Results: 46 articles were included. Mean sensitivity estimates for subgroups were 73.3-90.5% (US), 46.1-72.0% (CT), 82.0-97.4% (MRI) and 72.7-88.5% (1H-MRS). Mean specificity ranges were 69.6-85.2% (US), 88.1-94.6% (CT), 76.1-95.3% (MRI) and 92.0-95.7% (1H-MRS). Overall performance (lnDOR) of MRI and 1H-MRS was better than that for US and CT for all subgroups, with significant differences in groups 1 and 2.

Conclusion: MRI and 1H-MRS can be considered techniques of choice for accurate evaluation of hepatic steatosis.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Flow diagram of the articles included
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Study design characteristics of the 46 studies included
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Comparison of logarithmic diagnostic odds ratios of US, CT, MRI and 1H-MRS
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Angulo P. Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. N Engl J Med. 2002;346:1221–1231. doi: 10.1056/NEJMra011775. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Williams R. Global challenges in liver disease. Hepatology. 2006;44:521–526. doi: 10.1002/hep.21347. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Adams LA, Lymp JF, St Sauver J, Sanderson SO, Lindor KD, Feldstein A, Angulo P. The natural history of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: a population-based cohort study. Gastroenterology. 2005;129:113–121. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2005.04.014. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Farrell GC, Larter CZ. Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: from steatosis to cirrhosis. Hepatology. 2006;43:S99–S112. doi: 10.1002/hep.20973. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Rector RS, Thyfault JP, Wei Y, Ibdah JA. Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease and the metabolic syndrome: an update. World J Gastroenterol. 2008;14:185–192. doi: 10.3748/wjg.14.185. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types