0
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Diagnostic Accuracy of CT for the Detection of Hepatic Steatosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

      , , , , ,
      Radiology
      Radiological Society of North America (RSNA)

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Noncontrast CT was a reliable method for detection of at least moderate hepatic steatosis (over 20%–33% fat at biopsy), with a pooled sensitivity and specificity of 82% and 94%, respectively.

          Abstract

          Background CT plays an important role in the opportunistic identification of hepatic steatosis. CT performance for steatosis detection has been inconsistent across various studies, and no clear guidelines on optimum thresholds have been established. Purpose To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess CT diagnostic accuracy in hepatic steatosis detection and to determine reliable cutoffs for the commonly mentioned measures in the literature. Materials and Methods A systematic search of the PubMed, Embase, and Scopus databases (English-language studies published from September 1977 to January 2024) was performed. Studies evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of noncontrast CT (NCCT), contrast-enhanced (CECT), and dual-energy CT (DECT) for hepatic steatosis detection were included. Reference standards included biopsy, MRI proton density fat fraction (PDFF), or NCCT. In several CECT and DECT studies, NCCT was used as the reference standard, necessitating subgroup analysis. Statistical analysis included a random-effects meta-analysis, assessment of heterogeneity with use of the I 2 statistic, and meta-regression to explore potential sources of heterogeneity. When available, mean liver attenuation, liver-spleen attenuation difference, liver to spleen attenuation ratio, and the DECT-derived fat fraction for hepatic steatosis diagnosis were assessed. Results Forty-two studies (14 186 participants) were included. NCCT had a sensitivity and specificity of 72% and 88%, respectively, for steatosis (>5% fat at biopsy) detection and 82% and 94% for at least moderate steatosis (over 20%–33% fat at biopsy) detection. CECT had a sensitivity and specificity of 66% and 90% for steatosis detection and 68% and 93% for at least moderate steatosis detection. DECT had a sensitivity and specificity of 85% and 88% for steatosis detection. In the subgroup analysis, the sensitivity and specificity for detecting steatosis were 80% and 99% for CECT and 84% and 93% for DECT. There was heterogeneity among studies focusing on CECT and DECT. Liver attenuation less than 40–45 HU, liver-spleen attenuation difference less than −5 to 0 HU, and liver to spleen attenuation ratio less than 0.9–1 achieved high specificity for detection of at least moderate steatosis. Conclusion NCCT showed high performance for detection of at least moderate steatosis. © RSNA, 2024 Supplemental material is available for this article.

          Related collections

          Most cited references79

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Preferred Reporting Items for a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies

          Systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy synthesize data from primary diagnostic studies that have evaluated the accuracy of 1 or more index tests against a reference standard, provide estimates of test performance, allow comparisons of the accuracy of different tests, and facilitate the identification of sources of variability in test accuracy.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses of individual participant data: the PRISMA-IPD Statement.

            Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of individual participant data (IPD) aim to collect, check, and reanalyze individual-level data from all studies addressing a particular research question and are therefore considered a gold standard approach to evidence synthesis. They are likely to be used with increasing frequency as current initiatives to share clinical trial data gain momentum and may be particularly important in reviewing controversial therapeutic areas. To develop PRISMA-IPD as a stand-alone extension to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) Statement, tailored to the specific requirements of reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of IPD. Although developed primarily for reviews of randomized trials, many items will apply in other contexts, including reviews of diagnosis and prognosis. Development of PRISMA-IPD followed the EQUATOR Network framework guidance and used the existing standard PRISMA Statement as a starting point to draft additional relevant material. A web-based survey informed discussion at an international workshop that included researchers, clinicians, methodologists experienced in conducting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of IPD, and journal editors. The statement was drafted and iterative refinements were made by the project, advisory, and development groups. The PRISMA-IPD Development Group reached agreement on the PRISMA-IPD checklist and flow diagram by consensus. Compared with standard PRISMA, the PRISMA-IPD checklist includes 3 new items that address (1) methods of checking the integrity of the IPD (such as pattern of randomization, data consistency, baseline imbalance, and missing data), (2) reporting any important issues that emerge, and (3) exploring variation (such as whether certain types of individual benefit more from the intervention than others). A further additional item was created by reorganization of standard PRISMA items relating to interpreting results. Wording was modified in 23 items to reflect the IPD approach. PRISMA-IPD provides guidelines for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of IPD.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: a systematic review.

              Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease and its subtype nonalcoholic steatohepatitis affect approximately 30% and 5%, respectively, of the US population. In patients with nonalcoholic steatohepatitis, half of deaths are due to cardiovascular disease and malignancy, yet awareness of this remains low. Cirrhosis, the third leading cause of death in patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, is predicted to become the most common indication for liver transplantation.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                Journal
                Radiology
                Radiology
                Radiological Society of North America (RSNA)
                0033-8419
                1527-1315
                November 01 2024
                November 01 2024
                : 313
                : 2
                Article
                10.1148/radiol.241171
                39499183
                4da3b7ff-716b-49e8-aebd-7df5b874958f
                © 2024
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article