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
. 2015 Mar;13(3):440-451.e6.
doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2014.09.046. Epub 2014 Nov 20.

Diagnostic performance of magnetic resonance elastography in staging liver fibrosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data

Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Diagnostic performance of magnetic resonance elastography in staging liver fibrosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data

Siddharth Singh et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2015 Mar.

Abstract

Background & aims: Magnetic resonance elastography (MRE) is a noninvasive tool for staging liver fibrosis. We conducted a meta-analysis of individual participant data collected from published studies to assess the diagnostic accuracy of MRE for staging liver fibrosis in patients with chronic liver diseases (CLD).

Methods: Through a systematic literature search of multiple databases (2003-2013), we identified studies on diagnostic performance of MRE for staging liver fibrosis in patients with CLD with native anatomy, using liver biopsy as the standard. We contacted study authors to collect data on each participant's age, sex, body mass index (BMI), liver stiffness (measured by MRE), fibrosis stage, staging system used, degree of inflammation, etiology of CLD, and interval between MRE and biopsy. Through a pooled analysis, we calculated cluster-adjusted area under the receiver-operating curve, sensitivity, and specificity of MRE for any fibrosis (≥stage 1), significant fibrosis (≥stage 2), advanced fibrosis (≥stage 3), and cirrhosis (stage 4).

Results: We analyzed data from 12 retrospective studies, comprising 697 patients (mean age, 55 ± 13 y; 59.4% male; mean BMI, 26.9 ± 6.7 kg/m(2); 92.1% with <1 year interval between MRE and biopsy; and 47.1% with hepatitis C). Overall, 19.5%, 19.4%, 15.5%, 15.9%, and 29.7% patients had stage 0, 1, 2, 3, and 4 fibrosis, respectively. The mean area under the receiver-operating curve values (and 95% confidence intervals) for the diagnosis of any (≥stage 1), significant (≥stage 2), advanced fibrosis (≥stage 3), and cirrhosis, were as follows: 0.84 (0.76-0.92), 0.88 (0.84-0.91), 0.93 (0.90-0.95), and 0.92 (0.90-0.94), respectively. A similar diagnostic performance was observed in stratified analysis based on sex, obesity, and etiology of CLD. The overall rate of failure of MRE was 4.3%.

Conclusions: Based on a pooled analysis of data from individual participants, MRE has a high accuracy for the diagnosis of significant or advanced fibrosis and cirrhosis, independent of BMI and etiology of CLD. Prospective studies are warranted to better understand the diagnostic performance of MRE.

Keywords: Diagnostic Performance; Elastography; IPD; Noninvasive; Pooled Analysis.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow sheet summarizing study identification and selection.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Composite box-plot graph showing magnetic resonance elastography (MRE), stiffness values for various stages (METAVIR) of fibrosis. Horizontal line through each box represents a median value and each box top and bottom represent data from the 25th to 75th percentile (middle 50% of observations). Whiskers represent data from minimum to maximum excluding outliers which are represented as separate dots.

References

    1. Everhart JE, Ruhl CE. Burden of digestive diseases in the United States Part III: Liver, biliary tract, and pancreas. Gastroenterology. 2009;136:1134–44. - PubMed
    1. Asrani SK, Larson JJ, Yawn B, et al. Underestimation of liver-related mortality in the United States. Gastroenterology. 2013;145:375–82. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bravo AA, Sheth SG, Chopra S. Liver biopsy. N Engl J Med. 2001;344:495–500. - PubMed
    1. Regev A, Berho M, Jeffers LJ, et al. Sampling error and intraobserver variation in liver biopsy in patients with chronic HCV infection. Am J Gastroenterol. 2002;97:2614–8. - PubMed
    1. Castera L. Noninvasive methods to assess liver disease in patients with hepatitis B or C. Gastroenterology. 2012;142:1293–1302. - PubMed