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
Review
. 2025 Jun 24;15(13):1598.
doi: 10.3390/diagnostics15131598.

Comparing FIB-4, VCTE, pSWE, 2D-SWE, and MRE Thresholds and Diagnostic Accuracies for Detecting Hepatic Fibrosis in Patients with MASLD: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Affiliations
Review

Comparing FIB-4, VCTE, pSWE, 2D-SWE, and MRE Thresholds and Diagnostic Accuracies for Detecting Hepatic Fibrosis in Patients with MASLD: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Mitchell Patrick Wilson et al. Diagnostics (Basel). .

Abstract

Objectives: To compare thresholds and accuracies of FIB-4, vibration-controlled transient elastography (VCTE), point shear wave elastography (pSWE), 2D shear wave elastography (2D-SWE), and MR elastography (MRE) for detecting hepatic fibrosis in patients with MASLD. Materials and Methods: Systematic searching of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and the gray literature from inception to March 2024 was performed. Studies evaluating accuracies of FIB-4, VCTE, 2D-SWE, pSWE, and/or MRE for detecting significant (≥F2) and/or advanced (≥F3) hepatic fibrosis in MASLD patients compared to histology were identified. Full-text review and data extraction were performed independently by two reviewers. Multivariate meta-analysis and subgroup analyses were performed using index test and fibrosis grading. Risk of bias was assessed using QUADAS-2. Results: 207 studies with over 80,000 patient investigations were included. FIB-4 1.3 threshold sensitivity was 71% (95% CI 66-75%) for detecting advanced hepatic fibrosis, which improved to 88% (85-91%) using a <0.75 threshold. FIB-4 specificity using a 2.67 threshold was 96% (94-97%). Sensitivities of 88-91% were achieved using thresholds of 3.2 kPa for pSWE, 4.92 kPa for 2D-SWE, 7.18 kPa for VCTE, and 2.32 kPa for MRE. No significant differences were identified for sensitivities in subgroup analysis with thresholds between 7 and 9 kPa. Most imaging-based studies were high risk of bias for the index test. Conclusions: A FIB-4 threshold of <0.75 and modality-dependent thresholds (VCTE < 7 kPa; pSWE <3 kPa; 2D-SWE <5 kPa; and MRE <2.5 kPa) would achieve sensitivities of around 90% when defining low-risk MASLD in population screening. A modified two-tier algorithm aligning with existing Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound guidelines would improve risk stratification accuracies compared to existing guidelines by European and American liver societies.

Keywords: MASLD; MRE; SWE; accuracy; fibroScan; magnetic resonance elastography; metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease; shear wave elastography; systematic review; transient elastography.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
PRISMA flow diagram showing screening and selection of studies included in the systematic review.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Proposed two-tier blood-based followed by image-based risk stratification algorithm for population screening of patients with suspected or diagnosed MASLD. Metabolic risk factors = central obesity, high triglycerides, low HDL cholesterol, hypertension, prediabetes, or insulin resistance.

Similar articles

References

    1. Tacke F., Horn P., Wong V.W.-S., Ratziu V., Bugianesi E., Francque S., Zelber-Sagi S., Valenti L., Roden M., Schick F., et al. EASL–EASD–EASO Clinical Practice Guidelines on the management of metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) J. Hepatol. 2024;81:492–542. doi: 10.1016/j.jhep.2024.04.031. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Sterling R.K., Duarte-Rojo A., Patel K., Asrani S.K., Alsawas M., Dranoff J.A., Fiel M.I., Murad M.H., Leung D.H., Levine D., et al. AASLD Practice Guideline on imaging-based noninvasive liver disease assessment of hepatic fibrosis and steatosis. Hepatology. 2025;81:672–724. doi: 10.1097/HEP.0000000000000843. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Kanwal F., Shubrook J.H., Adams L.A., Pfotenhauer K., Wong V.W.-S., Wright E., Abdelmalek M.F., Harrison S.A., Loomba R., Mantzoros C.S., et al. Clinical Care Pathway for the Risk Stratification and Management of Patients with Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease. Gastroenterology. 2021;161:1657–1669. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2021.07.049. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Barr R.G., Wilson S.R., Rubens D., Garcia-Tsao G., Ferraioli G. Update to the Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound Liver Elastography Consensus Statement. Radiology. 2020;296:263–274. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2020192437. - DOI - PubMed
    1. McInnes M.D.F., Moher D., Thombs B.D., McGrath T.A., Bossuyt P.M., Clifford T., Cohen J.F., Deeks J.J., Gatsonis C., Hooft L., et al. Preferred Reporting Items for a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies. The PRISMA-DTA Statement. JAMA. 2018;319:388–396. doi: 10.1001/jama.2017.19163. Erratum in JAMA 2019, 322, 2026. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources