SynthesisJournal of medical ultrasonics (2001)2026
Diagnostic performance of ultrasound attenuation imaging in detecting hepatic steatosis.
Synthesis in Journal of medical ultrasonics (2001), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeHepatic steatosis is a hallmark of metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease, and increased hepatic fat (or steatosis) is associated with liver inflammation, fibrosis, and adverse outcomes. While MRI-derived proton density fat fraction (MRI-PDFF) is an accurate noninvasive reference standard, ultrasound attenuation imaging (UAI) offers an accessible cost-effective alternative. We herein systematically review and meta-analyze the accuracy of UAI in grading hepatic steatosis.
methodsWe searched Embase, PubMed/Medline, Scopus, and Web of Science through December 22, 2024, for studies comparing UAI with MRI-PDFF. Data on diagnostic performance were extracted from eligible studies. Pooled diagnostic odds ratios (DOR), sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios, and areas under the curve (AUCs) were calculated using random-effects models, with heterogeneity assessed through I
resultsTwelve studies with a total of 3344 patients were included. For differentiating grade 0 from grade ≥ 1 steatosis, the pooled AUC was 0.82 (95% CI 0.78-0.85) and DOR was 21.10 (I
conclusionUAI exhibits good diagnostic accuracy for grading hepatic steatosis and offers a practical, noninvasive alternative to MRI-PDFF, being particularly well-suited for screening and patient follow-up. Standardized protocols and further multicenter studies are needed to promote its clinical application.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41315081What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.